Suppr超能文献

多巴胺与去甲肾上腺素治疗脓毒性休克的比较:一项荟萃分析*。

Dopamine versus norepinephrine in the treatment of septic shock: a meta-analysis*.

机构信息

Department of Intensive Care, Erasme University Hospital, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2012 Mar;40(3):725-30. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31823778ee.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

There has long-been controversy about the possible superiority of norepinephrine compared to dopamine in the treatment of shock. The objective was to evaluate the effects of norepinephrine and dopamine on outcome and adverse events in patients with septic shock.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases, and of Google Scholar, up to June 30, 2011.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All studies providing information on the outcome of patients with septic shock treated with dopamine compared to norepinephrine were included. Observational and randomized trials were analyzed separately. Because time of outcome assessment varied among trials, we evaluated 28-day mortality or closest estimate. Heterogeneity among trials was assessed using the Cochrane Q homogeneity test. A Forest plot was constructed and the aggregate relative risk of death was computed. Potential publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots.

METHODS AND MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved five observational (1,360 patients) and six randomized (1,408 patients) trials, totaling 2,768 patients (1,474 who received norepinephrine and 1,294 who received dopamine). In observational studies, among which there was significant heterogeneity (p < .001), there was no difference in mortality (relative risk, 1.09; confidence interval, 0.84-1.41; p = .72). A sensitivity analysis identified one trial as being responsible for the heterogeneity; after exclusion of that trial, no heterogeneity was observed and dopamine administration was associated with an increased risk of death (relative risk, 1.23; confidence interval, 1.05-1.43; p < .01). In randomized trials, for which no heterogeneity or publication bias was detected (p = .77), dopamine was associated with an increased risk of death (relative risk, 1.12; confidence interval, 1.01-1.20; p = .035). In the two trials that reported arrhythmias, these were more frequent with dopamine than with norepinephrine (relative risk, 2.34; confidence interval, 1.46-3.77; p = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with septic shock, dopamine administration is associated with greater mortality and a higher incidence of arrhythmic events compared to norepinephrine administration.

摘要

目的

去甲肾上腺素在休克治疗中可能优于多巴胺,这一观点一直存在争议。本研究旨在评估去甲肾上腺素和多巴胺对感染性休克患者结局和不良事件的影响。

资料来源

系统检索 MEDLINE、Embase、Scopus 和 CENTRAL 数据库以及 Google Scholar,检索时限截至 2011 年 6 月 30 日。

研究选择和资料提取

纳入所有提供多巴胺治疗感染性休克患者结局信息的研究。分别分析观察性研究和随机试验。由于各试验的结局评估时间不同,我们评估了 28 天死亡率或最接近的估计值。采用 Cochrane Q 同质性检验评估试验间的异质性。绘制森林图并计算死亡的综合相对危险度。采用漏斗图评估潜在的发表偏倚。

方法和主要结果

我们检索到 5 项观察性研究(1360 例患者)和 6 项随机试验(1408 例患者),共计 2768 例患者(1474 例接受去甲肾上腺素治疗,1294 例接受多巴胺治疗)。在观察性研究中,存在显著的异质性(P<0.001),死亡率无差异(相对危险度,1.09;95%置信区间,0.841.41;P=0.72)。敏感性分析发现一项试验是异质性的来源;排除该试验后,未观察到异质性,且多巴胺治疗与死亡风险增加相关(相对危险度,1.23;95%置信区间,1.051.43;P<0.01)。在未检测到异质性或发表偏倚的随机试验中(P=0.77),多巴胺治疗与死亡风险增加相关(相对危险度,1.12;95%置信区间,1.011.20;P=0.035)。在报告心律失常的两项试验中,多巴胺组心律失常的发生率高于去甲肾上腺素组(相对危险度,2.34;95%置信区间,1.463.77;P=0.001)。

结论

与去甲肾上腺素相比,感染性休克患者应用多巴胺治疗与死亡率增加和心律失常发生率升高相关。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验