Suppr超能文献

脓毒性休克中的血管加压素:随机对照试验的个体患者数据荟萃分析。

Vasopressin in septic shock: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

机构信息

Section of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, St. Paul's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

出版信息

Intensive Care Med. 2019 Jun;45(6):844-855. doi: 10.1007/s00134-019-05620-2. Epub 2019 May 6.

Abstract

PURPOSE

We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the possible benefits and harms of vasopressin therapy in adults with septic shock both overall and in pre-defined subgroups.

METHODS

Our pre-specified study protocol is published on PROSPERO, CRD42017071698. We identified randomised clinical trials up to January 2019 investigating vasopressin therapy versus any other vasoactive comparator in adults with septic shock. Individual patient data from each trial were compiled. Conventional two-stage meta-analyses were performed as well as one-stage regression models with single treatment covariate interactions for subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Four trials were included with a total of 1453 patients. For the primary outcomes, there was no effect of vasopressin on 28-day mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.86-1.12] or serious adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82-1.26). Vasopressin led to more digital ischaemia [absolute risk difference (ARD) 1.7%, 95% CI 0.3%-3.2%] but fewer arrhythmias (ARD - 2.8%, 95% CI - 0.2% to - 5.3%). Mesenteric ischaemia and acute coronary syndrome events were similar between groups. Vasopressin reduced the requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT) (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-0.99), but this finding was not robust to sensitivity analyses. There were no statistically significant interactions in the pre-defined subgroups (baseline kidney injury severity, baseline lactate, baseline norepinephrine requirement and time to study inclusion).

CONCLUSIONS

Vasopressin therapy in septic shock had no effect on 28-day mortality although the confidence intervals are wide. It appears safe but with a different side effect profile from norepinephrine. The finding on reduced RRT should be interpreted cautiously. Future trials should focus on long-term outcomes in select patient groups as well as incorporating cost effectiveness analyses regarding possible reduced RRT use.

摘要

目的

我们进行了一项个体患者数据荟萃分析,以调查在成人感染性休克中使用血管加压素治疗的可能益处和危害,包括总体和预先定义的亚组。

方法

我们的预先指定的研究方案发表在 PROSPERO 上,CRD42017071698。我们确定了截至 2019 年 1 月的调查血管加压素治疗与成人感染性休克中任何其他血管活性比较剂的随机临床试验。从每个试验中汇编了个体患者数据。进行了常规两阶段荟萃分析,以及具有单一治疗协变量相互作用的单阶段回归模型进行亚组分析。

结果

共有四项试验纳入了 1453 名患者。对于主要结局,血管加压素对 28 天死亡率(相对风险 [RR] 0.98,95%CI 0.86-1.12)或严重不良事件(RR 1.02,95%CI 0.82-1.26)没有影响。血管加压素导致更多的数字缺血(绝对风险差异 [ARD] 1.7%,95%CI 0.3%-3.2%),但心律失常较少(ARD-2.8%,95%CI-0.2%-0.5%)。肠系膜缺血和急性冠状动脉综合征事件在两组之间相似。血管加压素减少了肾脏替代治疗(RRT)的需求(RR 0.86,95%CI 0.74-0.99),但这一发现对敏感性分析不稳健。在预先定义的亚组中没有统计学显著的相互作用(基线肾脏损伤严重程度、基线乳酸、基线去甲肾上腺素需求和纳入研究的时间)。

结论

在感染性休克中使用血管加压素治疗对 28 天死亡率没有影响,尽管置信区间较宽。它似乎是安全的,但与去甲肾上腺素的副作用谱不同。关于减少 RRT 使用的发现应谨慎解释。未来的试验应关注选定患者群体的长期结局,并结合可能减少 RRT 使用的成本效益分析。

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