Rimmer Emily, Houston Brett L, Kumar Anand, Abou-Setta Ahmed M, Friesen Carol, Marshall John C, Rock Gail, Turgeon Alexis F, Cook Deborah J, Houston Donald S, Zarychanski Ryan
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Manitoba, GC425-820 Sherbrook Street, HSC, Winnipeg, R3A 1R9, Canada.
Department of Haematology and Medical Oncology, CancerCare Manitoba, 675 McDermot Ave, Winnipeg, R3E 0V9, Canada.
Crit Care. 2014 Dec 20;18(6):699. doi: 10.1186/s13054-014-0699-2.
Sepsis and septic shock are leading causes of intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. They are characterized by excessive inflammation, upregulation of procoagulant proteins and depletion of natural anticoagulants. Plasma exchange has the potential to improve survival in sepsis by removing inflammatory cytokines and restoring deficient plasma proteins. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasma exchange in patients with sepsis.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus, reference lists of relevant articles, and grey literature for relevant citations. We included randomized controlled trials comparing plasma exchange or plasma filtration with usual care in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock. Two reviewers independently identified trials, extracted trial-level data and performed risk of bias assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality reported at longest follow-up. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.
Of 1,957 records identified, we included four unique trials enrolling a total of 194 patients (one enrolling adults only, two enrolling children only, one enrolling adults and children). The mean age of adult patients ranged from 38 to 53 years (n = 128) and the mean age of children ranged from 0.9 to 18 years (n = 66). All trials were at unclear to high risk of bias. The use of plasma exchange was not associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 1.52, I(2) 60%). In adults, plasma exchange was associated with reduced mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96; I(2) 0%), but was not in children (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.38; I(2) 60%). None of the trials reported ICU or hospital lengths of stay. Only one trial reported adverse events associated with plasma exchange including six episodes of hypotension and one allergic reaction to fresh frozen plasma.
Insufficient evidence exists to recommend plasma exchange as an adjunctive therapy for patients with sepsis or septic shock. Rigorous randomized controlled trials evaluating clinically relevant patient-centered outcomes are required to evaluate the impact of plasma exchange in this condition.
脓毒症和脓毒性休克是重症监护病房(ICU)死亡的主要原因。其特征为过度炎症反应、促凝血蛋白上调以及天然抗凝物质耗竭。血浆置换有可能通过清除炎性细胞因子和恢复缺乏的血浆蛋白来提高脓毒症患者的生存率。本研究的目的是评估血浆置换在脓毒症患者中的疗效和安全性。
我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、CENTRAL、Scopus、相关文章的参考文献列表以及灰色文献,以获取相关引文。我们纳入了比较血浆置换或血浆滤过与脓毒症或脓毒性休克重症患者常规治疗的随机对照试验。两名研究者独立识别试验、提取试验水平的数据,并使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行偏倚风险评估。主要结局是最长随访期报告的全因死亡率。使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。
在识别出的1957条记录中,我们纳入了4项独特的试验,共纳入194例患者(1项仅纳入成人,2项仅纳入儿童,1项纳入成人和儿童)。成年患者的平均年龄在38至53岁之间(n = 128),儿童的平均年龄在0.9至18岁之间(n = 66)。所有试验的偏倚风险均为不明确至高风险。使用血浆置换与全因死亡率显著降低无关(风险比(RR)0.83,95%置信区间(CI)0.