Glycemic control in the critically ill: Less is more.

Hyperglycemia is associated with poor clinical outcomes in critically ill patients. Initial clinical trials of intensive insulin therapy targeting blood glucose levels of 80 to 110 mg/dL showed improved outcomes, but subsequent trials found no benefits and even increased harm with this approach. Emerging literature has evaluated other glycemic indices including time-in-target blood glucose range, glycemic variability, and stress hyperglycemia ratio. These indices, while well described in observational studies, have not been addressed in the initial trials. Additionally, the patient's pre existing diabetes status and preadmission diabetic control may modulate the outcomes of stringent glycemic control, with worse outcomes of hyperglycemia being observed in patients without diabetes and in those with well-controlled diabetes. Most medical societies recommend less stringent glucose control in the range of 140 to 180 mg/dL for critically ill patients.

Microvascular Angina: Diagnosis and Management.

Recognition of suspected ischaemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease - termed INOCA - has increased over the past decades, with a key contributor being microvascular angina. Patients with microvascular angina are at higher risk for major adverse cardiac events including MI, stroke, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and death but to date there are no clear evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and treatment. Recently, the Coronary Vasomotion Disorders International Study Group proposed standardised criteria for diagnosis of microvascular angina using invasive and non-invasive approaches. The management strategy for remains empirical, largely due to the lack of high-levelevidence- based guidelines and clinical trials. In this review, the authors will illustrate the updated approach to diagnosis of microvascular angina and address evidence-based pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for patients with the condition.