-
Critical Care (London, England) Apr 2024A systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCOR) on gas exchange and respiratory settings in critically ill... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
A systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCOR) on gas exchange and respiratory settings in critically ill adults with respiratory failure.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive database search, including observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from January 2000 to March 2022, targeting adult ICU patients undergoing ECCOR. Primary outcomes were changes in gas exchange and ventilator settings 24 h after ECCOR initiation, estimated as mean of differences, or proportions for adverse events (AEs); with subgroup analyses for disease indication and technology. Across RCTs, we assessed mortality, length of stay, ventilation days, and AEs as mean differences or odds ratios.
RESULTS
A total of 49 studies encompassing 1672 patients were included. ECCOR was associated with a significant decrease in PaCO, plateau pressure, and tidal volume and an increase in pH across all patient groups, at an overall 19% adverse event rate. In ARDS and lung transplant patients, the PaO/FiO ratio increased significantly while ventilator settings were variable. "Higher extraction" systems reduced PaCO and respiratory rate more efficiently. The three available RCTs did not demonstrate an effect on mortality, but a significantly longer ICU and hospital stay associated with ECCOR.
CONCLUSIONS
ECCOR effectively reduces PaCO and acidosis allowing for less invasive ventilation. "Higher extraction" systems may be more efficient to achieve this goal. However, as RCTs have not shown a mortality benefit but increase AEs, ECCOR's effects on clinical outcome remain unclear. Future studies should target patient groups that may benefit from ECCOR. PROSPERO Registration No: CRD 42020154110 (on January 24, 2021).
Topics: Humans; Carbon Dioxide; Pulmonary Gas Exchange; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 38693569
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-024-04927-x -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which appeared in 2019, has been classified as critical and non-critical according to clinical signs and symptoms.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION
Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which appeared in 2019, has been classified as critical and non-critical according to clinical signs and symptoms. Critical patients require mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, whereas non-critical patients require neither mechanical ventilation nor ICU admission. Several factors have been recently identified as effective factors, including blood cell count, enzymes, blood markers, and underlying diseases. By comparing blood markers, comorbidities, co-infections, and their relationship with mortality, we sought to determine differences between critical and non-critical groups.
METHOD
We used Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases for our systematic search. Inclusion criteria include any report describing the clinical course of COVID-19 patients and showing the association of the COVID-19 clinical courses with blood cells, blood markers, and bacterial co-infection changes. Twenty-one publications were eligible for full-text examination between 2019 to 2021.
RESULT
The standard difference in WBC, lymphocyte, and platelet between the two clinical groups was 0.538, -0.670, and -0.421, respectively. Also, the standard difference between the two clinical groups of CRP, ALT, and AST was 0.482, 0.402, and 0.463, respectively. The odds ratios for hypertension and diabetes were significantly different between the two groups. The prevalence of co-infection also in the critical group is higher.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, our data suggest that critical patients suffer from a suppressed immune system, and the inflammation level, the risk of organ damage, and co-infections are significantly high in the critical group and suggests the use of bacteriostatic instead of bactericides to treat co-infections.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Critical Illness; Biomarkers; Comorbidity; Coinfection; Intensive Care Units; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 38690274
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1341168 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Apr 2024Persistent inflammation, immunosuppression, and catabolism syndrome (PICS) has been proposed as an endotype of chronic critical illness (CCI). The aim of this systematic... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Persistent inflammation, immunosuppression, and catabolism syndrome (PICS) has been proposed as an endotype of chronic critical illness (CCI). The aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the available evidence of risk factors, biomarkers, and biological mechanisms underlying PICS.
METHODS
MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched on June 2, 2023. Our population of interest was adult intensive care unit survivors. The exposure group was patients with PICS and the comparator group was patients with no PICS, CCI, or rapid recovery. Mean differences were pooled for each biomarker using a random effects DerSimonian-Laird method. Risk of bias assessment was done using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
Six papers were included. Five were single-centre retrospective cohort studies, and one was a prospective cohort study, with sample sizes ranging from 22 to 391 patients. Two studies showed an increased incidence of PICS with age, and two studies showed an association between PICS and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores. PICS was associated with requiring mechanical ventilation in four studies. Meta-analysis showed a 34.4 mg L higher C-reactive protein (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.7-56.2 mg L; P<0.01), a 4.4 g L lower albumin (95% CI 0.5-8.3 g L; P<0.01), and a 0.36×10 L lower lymphocyte count (95% CI 0.25-0.47×10 L; P=0.01) in the PICS compared with the non-PICS group. There are a large variety of other potential biomarkers but limited validation studies. The overall quality of evidence is limited, and these results should be interpreted accordingly.
CONCLUSIONS
While older patients and those with co-morbidities could be at greater risk for PICS, acquired risk factors, such as injury severity, are potentially more predictive of PICS than intrinsic patient characteristics. There are many potential biomarkers for PICS, but limited validation studies have been conducted. Persistent myeloid-derived suppressor cell expansion, the continual release of danger-associated molecular patterns and pathogen-associated molecular patterns propagating inflammation, and bioenergetic failure are all mechanisms underlying PICS that could offer potential for novel biomarkers and therapeutic interventions.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42023427749).
PubMed: 38688799
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2024.03.038 -
Cureus Mar 2024Pneumonia is one of the most prevalent medical complications post-stroke. It can have negative impacts on the prognosis of stroke patients. This study aimed to determine... (Review)
Review
Pneumonia is one of the most prevalent medical complications post-stroke. It can have negative impacts on the prognosis of stroke patients. This study aimed to determine the predictors of pneumonia in stroke patients. The authors devised, reviewed, and enhanced the search strategy in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were gathered from various electronic databases, including Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science, from January 1st, 2011, to February 25th, 2024. The review encompassed studies involving patients aged 18 years and older who were hospitalized for acute stroke care. Inclusion criteria required patients to have received a clinical diagnosis of stroke, confirmed via medical imaging (CT or MRI), hospital primary diagnosis International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision discharge codes, or pathology reporting. A total of 35 studies met the criteria and were included in our pooled analysis. Among them, 23 adopted a retrospective design, while the remaining 12 were prospective. The pooled incidence of pneumonia among patients with stroke was found to be 14% (95% confidence interval = 13%-15%). The pooled analysis reported that advancing age, male gender, a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the presence of a nasogastric tube, atrial fibrillation, mechanical ventilation, stroke severity, dysphagia, and a history of diabetes were identified as significant risk factors for pneumonia development among stroke patients. Our results underscore the importance of proactive identification and management of these factors to mitigate the risk of pneumonia in stroke patients.
PubMed: 38681338
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57077 -
Cureus Mar 2024Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rare and debilitating autoimmune disorder that affects the peripheral nervous system. Although the exact etiology of GBS is still... (Review)
Review
Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rare and debilitating autoimmune disorder that affects the peripheral nervous system. Although the exact etiology of GBS is still unknown, it is thought to be triggered by a preceding gastrointestinal infection in most of the cases. Clinical manifestations include limb weakness, areflexia, and sensory loss that can further progress to neuromuscular paralysis affecting the respiratory, facial, and bulbar functions. Both plasmapheresis (PE) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) have shown effectiveness in the treatment of GBS, but it is still unclear which treatment approach is superior in terms of therapeutic efficacy. This systematic review acts per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. For appropriate studies and research, we searched PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Science Direct, and Google Scholar. Screening of articles was performed based on relevance and inclusion and exclusion criteria. To check for bias, we used relevant quality appraisal tools. Initially, we found 2454 articles. After removing duplicates and irrelevant papers, we finalized 31 studies based on titles, abstracts, and reading entire articles. We excluded 14 studies because of poor quality; the remaining 17 papers were included in this review. IVIG is equally efficacious as PE in improving primary outcomes and secondary outcomes. IVIG showed a slight advantage over PE in reducing the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and hospital stay duration. However, in children, PE demonstrated a slight edge in improving secondary outcomes. PE was associated with a slightly higher risk of adverse events and post-treatment worsening symptoms compared to IVIG. IVIG is considered more user-friendly with a significantly lower patient discontinuation rate than PE. IVIG treatment was found to be significantly more expensive than PE.
PubMed: 38681292
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57066 -
European Journal of Medical Research Apr 2024Amidst the routine utilization of protocolized sedation in ventilated ICU patients, existing management guidelines exhibit a lack of unanimous recommendations for its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Amidst the routine utilization of protocolized sedation in ventilated ICU patients, existing management guidelines exhibit a lack of unanimous recommendations for its widespread adoption. This study endeavors to comprehensively assess the effectiveness and safety of protocolized sedation in critically ill ventilated patients.
OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of this study was to systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing protocolized sedation with standard management in critically ill ventilated patients. Key outcomes under scrutiny include ICU and hospital mortality, ventilation days, duration of ICU stay, and incidents of self-extubation. The evaluation incorporates the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool to assess the quality of included studies. Data analysis utilizes a random-effects model for relative risk (RR) and mean differences. Subgroup analysis categorizes sedation protocols into algorithmic or daily interruption, addressing potential heterogeneity. Additionally, a GRADE evaluation is performed to ascertain the overall certainty of the evidence.
RESULTS
From an initial pool of 1504 records, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Protocolized sedation demonstrated a reduced RR for mortality (RR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.68-0.93, p < 0.01, I = 0%) and a decrease in ventilation days (mean difference: - 1.12, 95% CI - 2.11 to - 0.14, p = 0.03, I = 84%). Furthermore, there was a notable reduction in ICU stay (mean difference: - 2.24, 95% CI - 3.59 to - 0.89, p < 0.01, I = 81%). However, incidents of self-extubation did not exhibit a significant difference (RR: 1.20, 95% CI 0.49-2.94, p = 0.69, I = 35%). Subgroup analyses effectively eliminated heterogeneity (I = 0%), and the GRADE evaluation yielded moderate results for mortality, ventilation days, and ICU duration.
CONCLUSION
Protocolized sedation, whether implemented algorithmically or through daily interruption, emerges as a safe and effective approach when compared to standard management in ventilated ICU patients. The findings from this study contribute valuable insights to inform evidence-based practices in sedation management for this critical patient population.
Topics: Humans; Intensive Care Units; Respiration, Artificial; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Conscious Sedation; Hospital Mortality; Length of Stay; Clinical Protocols
PubMed: 38659054
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-024-01839-y -
Public Health Nutrition Apr 2024Several meta-analyses have suggested the beneficial effect of vitamin D on patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2. This umbrella... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Several meta-analyses have suggested the beneficial effect of vitamin D on patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2. This umbrella meta-analysis aims to evaluate influence of vitamin D supplementation on clinical outcomes and the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients.
DESIGN
Present study was designed as an umbrella meta-analysis. The following international databases were systematically searched till March 2023: Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase.
SETTINGS
Random-effects model was employed to perform meta-analysis. Using AMSTAR critical evaluation tools, the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses was evaluated.
PARTICIPANTS
Adult patients suffering from COVID-19 were studied.
RESULTS
Overall, 13 meta-analyses summarising data from 4 randomised controlled trial and 9 observational studies were identified in this umbrella review. Our findings revealed that vitamin D supplementation and status significantly reduced mortality of COVID-19 [Interventional studies: (ES = 0·42; 95 % CI: 0·10, 0·75, < 0·001; = 20·4 %, = 0·285) and observational studies (ES = 1·99; 95 % CI: 1·37, 2·62, < 0·001; = 00·0 %, = 0·944). Also, vitamin D deficiency increased the risk of infection and disease severity among patients.
CONCLUSION
Overall, vitamin D status is a critical factor influencing the mortality rate, disease severity, admission to intensive care unit and being detached from mechanical ventilation. It is vital to monitor the vitamin D status in all patients with critical conditions including COVID patients.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Critical Care; Dietary Supplements; Intensive Care Units; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; SARS-CoV-2; Vitamin D; Vitamin D Deficiency; Vitamins
PubMed: 38654693
DOI: 10.1017/S1368980024000934 -
BMJ Open Apr 2024We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of colchicine treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of colchicine treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2023.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of colchicine treatment in patients with COVID-19 as compared with placebo or standard of care were included. There were no language restrictions. Studies that used colchicine prophylactically were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
We extracted all information relating to the study characteristics, such as author names, location, study population, details of intervention and comparator groups, and our outcomes of interest. We conducted our meta-analysis by using RevMan V.5.4 with risk ratio (RR) and mean difference as the effect measures.
RESULTS
We included 23 RCTs (28 249 participants) in this systematic review. Colchicine did not decrease the risk of mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I=0%; 20 RCTs, 25 824 participants), with the results being consistent among both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. There were no significant differences between the colchicine and control groups in other relevant clinical outcomes, including the incidence of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; p=0.22; I=40%; 8 RCTs, 13 262 participants), intensive care unit admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.22; p=0.27; I=0%; 6 RCTs, 961 participants) and hospital admission (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; p=0.19; I=70%; 3 RCTs, 8572 participants).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this meta-analysis do not support the use of colchicine as a treatment for reducing the risk of mortality or improving other relevant clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, RCTs investigating early treatment with colchicine (within 5 days of symptom onset or in patients with early-stage disease) are needed to fully elucidate the potential benefits of colchicine in this patient population.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022369850.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Colchicine; Hospitalization; Respiration, Artificial; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38631824
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074373 -
Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular... Apr 2024Intravenous non-volatile anaesthetics like propofol are commonly used in cardiac surgeries across several countries. Volatile anaesthetics like isoflurane may help in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison Between the Protective Effect of Isoflurane and Propofol on Myocardium During Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
Intravenous non-volatile anaesthetics like propofol are commonly used in cardiac surgeries across several countries. Volatile anaesthetics like isoflurane may help in protecting the myocardium and minimize ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Hence, we did this review to compare the cardioprotective effect of isoflurane and propofol among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
METHODS
We conducted a search in the databases Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (or MEDLINE), Embase, PubMed Central®, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library from inception until April 2021. We carried out a meta-analysis with random-effects model and reported pooled risk ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) depending on the type of outcome.
RESULTS
We analysed 13 studies including 808 participants. Almost all were low-quality studies. For cardiac index, the pooled SMD was 0.14 (95% CI: -0.22 to 0.50); for cardiac troponin I, pooled SMD was 0.10 (95% CI: -0.28 to 0.48). For mortality, the RR was 3.00 (95% CI: 0.32 to 28.43); for MI, pooled RR was 1.58 (95% CI: 0.59 to 4.20); and for inotropic drug use, pooled RR was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.90 to 1.21). For length of intensive care unit stay, the pooled SMD was 0.13 (95% CI: -0.29 to 0.55), while pooled SMD for mechanical ventilation time was -0.02 (95% CI: -0.54 to 0.51).
CONCLUSION
Isoflurane did not have significant cardioprotective effect compared to propofol following CABG. Hence, the anaesthetists need to check some viable alternatives to manage these patients and reduce the rate of postoperative complications.
Topics: Humans; Propofol; Isoflurane; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Coronary Artery Bypass; Myocardium; Anesthetics
PubMed: 38629941
DOI: 10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0424 -
BMC Palliative Care Apr 2024Breathlessness is a prevalent symptom affecting the quality of life (QOL) of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) patients. This systematic review explored the...
BACKGROUND
Breathlessness is a prevalent symptom affecting the quality of life (QOL) of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) patients. This systematic review explored the interventions for controlling breathlessness in ALS patients, emphasizing palliative care (PALC), non-invasive ventilation (NIV), opioids, and non-pharmacological strategies.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was conducted. Eligibility criteria encompassed adults with ALS or motor neuron disease experiencing breathlessness. Outcomes included QOL and symptom control. Study designs comprised qualitative studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included, most exhibiting low bias risk, comprising one randomized controlled trial, three cohort studies, two comparative retrospective studies, and two qualitative studies (interviews). Most studies originated from Europe, with one from the United States of America. The participants totaled 3423, with ALS patients constituting 95.6%. PALC consultations significantly improved symptom assessment, advance care planning, and discussions about goals of care. NIV demonstrated efficacy in managing breathlessness, with considerations for device limitations. Opioids were effective, though predominantly studied in non-ALS patients. Non-pharmacological strategies varied in efficacy among patients.
CONCLUSION
The findings underscore the need for individualized approaches in managing breathlessness in ALS. PALC, NIV, opioids, and non-pharmacological strategies each play a role, with unique considerations. Further research, especially ALS-specific self-management studies, is warranted.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Motor Neuron Disease; Noninvasive Ventilation; Dyspnea
PubMed: 38622643
DOI: 10.1186/s12904-024-01429-z