Gu Jiajie, Huang Haoping, Huang Yuejun, Sun Haitao, Xu Hongwu
College of Medicine, Shantou University, Shantou, Guangdong, China.
Transforming Medical Center, Second Affiliated Hospital of Medical College of Shantou University, North Dongxia Rd, Shantou, 515041, Guangdong, China.
Neurosurg Rev. 2019 Jun;42(2):499-509. doi: 10.1007/s10143-018-0991-8. Epub 2018 Jun 15.
Hyperosmolar therapy is regarded as the mainstay for treatment of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) in traumatic brain injury (TBI). This still has been disputed as application of hypertonic saline (HS) or mannitol for treating patients with severe TBI. Thus, this meta-analysis was performed to further compare the advantages and disadvantages of mannitol with HS for treating elevated ICP after TBI. We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Wan Fang Data, VIP Data, SinoMed, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases. Studies were included or not based on the quality assessment by the Jadad scale and selection criteria. Twelve RCTs with 438 patients were enrolled for the meta-analysis. The comparison of HS and mannitol indicated that they were close in field of improving function outcome (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.54, p = 0.258) and reducing intracranial pressure (MD = - 0.16, 95% CI: - 0.59 to 0.27, p = 0.473) and mortality (RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16, p = 0.216). The pooled relative risk of successful ICP control was 1.06 (95% CI: 1.00 to 1.13, p = 0.044), demonstrating that HS was more effective than mannitol in ICP management. Both serum sodium (WMD = 5.30, 95% CI: 4.37 to 6.22, p < 0.001) and osmolality (WMD = 3.03, 95% CI: 0.18 to 5.88, p = 0.037) were increased after injection of hypertonic saline. The results do not lend a specific recommendation to select hypertonic saline or mannitol as a first-line for the patients with elevated ICP caused by TBI. However, for the refractory intracranial hypertension, hypertonic saline seems to be preferred.
高渗疗法被视为治疗创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者颅内压(ICP)升高的主要方法。然而,对于使用高渗盐水(HS)或甘露醇治疗重度TBI患者,这一点仍存在争议。因此,进行了这项荟萃分析,以进一步比较甘露醇与HS治疗TBI后ICP升高的优缺点。我们在PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、万方数据、维普资讯、中国生物医学文献数据库和中国知网数据库中进行了系统检索。根据Jadad量表的质量评估和选择标准纳入或排除研究。12项随机对照试验(RCT)共438例患者被纳入荟萃分析。HS与甘露醇的比较表明,在改善功能结局方面(风险比[RR]=1.17,95%可信区间[CI]为0.89至1.54,p=0.258)、降低颅内压方面(平均差[MD]=-0.16,95%CI:-0.59至0.27,p=0.473)以及死亡率方面(RR=0.78,95%CI为0.53至1.16,p=0.216)两者相近。成功控制ICP的合并相对风险为1.06(95%CI:1.00至1.13,p=0.044),表明在ICP管理方面HS比甘露醇更有效。注射高渗盐水后血清钠(加权平均差[WMD]=5.30,95%CI:4.37至6.22,p<0.001)和渗透压(WMD=3.03,95%CI:0.18至5.88,p=0.037)均升高。结果并不支持针对TBI导致ICP升高的患者选择高渗盐水或甘露醇作为一线治疗方法。然而,对于难治性颅内高压,高渗盐水似乎更受青睐。