Suppr超能文献

早期肾脏替代治疗与 ICU 标准治疗的比较:系统评价、荟萃分析和成本分析。

Early Renal Replacement Therapy Versus Standard Care in the ICU: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Cost Analysis.

机构信息

1 Department of Internal Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

2 Department of Critical Care Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

J Intensive Care Med. 2019 Apr;34(4):323-329. doi: 10.1177/0885066617698635. Epub 2017 Mar 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

: Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is the treatment of choice for severe acute kidney injury, but there are no firm guidelines as to the time of initiation of RRT in the critically ill. The primary objective of this study is to determine 1-month mortality rates of early versus late dialysis in critical care. As secondary end points, we provide a cost analysis of early versus late RRT initiation, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and number of patients on dialysis at day 60 postrandomization.

DATA SOURCES

: We identified all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through EMLINE and MEDBASE that examined adult patients admitted to critical care who were randomized to receiving early dialysis versus standard of care.

STUDY SELECTION

: Inclusion criteria: (1) RCTs conducted after the year 2000, (2) the population evaluated had to be adults admitted to ICU, (3) the intervention had to be early RRT versus standard care, and (4) outcomes had to measure patient mortality.

DATA EXTRACTION

: Two independent investigators reviewed search results and identified appropriate studies. Information was extracted using standardized case report forms.

DATA SYNTHESIS

: Overall, 7 RCTs were included with a total of 1400 patients. Early RRT showed no survival benefit when compared to standard treatment (odds ratio [OR], 0.90 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.70-1.15, P = .39). There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay in patients with early RRT (-1.55 days [95% CI -4.75 to 1.65, P = .34]), in length of ICU stay (-0.79 days [95% CI -2.09 to 0.52], P = .24), or proportion of patients on dialysis at day 60 (OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.62 to 1.43], P = .79). Per patient, there is likely a small increase in costs (<US$1000) owing to increased total dialysis.

CONCLUSION

: Across all measured domains, there is no clear benefit to early RRT. Moreover, this intervention may result in increased costs and exposes patients to an invasive therapy with potential harm.

摘要

目的

肾脏替代疗法(RRT)是治疗严重急性肾损伤的首选方法,但对于重症患者何时开始 RRT 尚无明确的指南。本研究的主要目的是确定重症监护中早期与晚期透析的 1 个月死亡率。作为次要终点,我们提供了早期与晚期 RRT 启动、重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间(LOS)、医院 LOS 和随机分组后第 60 天透析患者数量的成本分析。

资料来源

我们通过 EMLINE 和 MEDBASE 确定了所有检查成年患者入住重症监护并随机分为早期透析与标准治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。

研究选择

纳入标准:(1)2000 年后进行的 RCT;(2)评估人群必须为入住 ICU 的成年人;(3)干预措施必须为早期 RRT 与标准治疗;(4)结局必须为患者死亡率。

资料提取

两名独立研究者审查搜索结果并确定了合适的研究。使用标准化病例报告表提取信息。

资料综合

共纳入 7 项 RCT,共 1400 例患者。与标准治疗相比,早期 RRT 并未显示生存获益(比值比[OR],0.90;95%置信区间[95%CI],0.70-1.15,P=0.39)。早期 RRT 患者的住院时间(-1.55 天[95%CI,-4.75 至 1.65,P=0.34])、ICU 住院时间(-0.79 天[95%CI,-2.09 至 0.52,P=0.24])或第 60 天透析患者比例(OR,0.93;95%CI,0.62 至 1.43,P=0.79)均无显著差异。每个患者的透析总成本可能略有增加(<1000 美元),这是由于透析次数增加所致。

结论

在所有测量的领域,早期 RRT 均无明显获益。此外,这种干预可能导致成本增加,并使患者面临潜在危害的侵入性治疗。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验