Suppr超能文献

血管加压素或其类似物与单独使用儿茶酚胺相比对感染性休克患者的临床疗效:一项系统评价和荟萃分析

Clinical Efficiency of Vasopressin or Its Analogs in Comparison With Catecholamines Alone on Patients With Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Yao Ren-Qi, Xia De-Meng, Wang Li-Xue, Wu Guo-Sheng, Zhu Yi-Bing, Zhao Hong-Qiang, Liu Qi, Xia Zhao-Fan, Ren Chao, Yao Yong-Ming

机构信息

Trauma Research Center, Fourth Medical Center of the Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.

Department of Burn Surgery, Changhai Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

Front Pharmacol. 2020 May 6;11:563. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00563. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Vasopressin is an efficient remedy for septic shock patients as its great capacity in promoting hemodynamic stabilization. The aim of current systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the clinical efficiency of vasopressin or its analogs with sole catecholamines on patients with septic shock.

METHODS

A systematic search of Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed online databases was performed up to 30 Oct 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials comparing use of vasopressin or its analogs (e.g., terlipressin, selepressin) with administration of catecholamines alone.

RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs with 4,225 patients in the current study. Compared with solely use of catecholamines, administration of vasopressin or its analogs was not associated with reduced 28-day or 30-day mortality among patients with septic shock [RR=0.94 (95% CI, 0.87-1.01), =0.08, I = 0%]. The result of primary endpoint remained unchanged after conducting sensitivity analysis. Despite a significantly higher risk of digital ischemia in patients receiving vasopressin or its analogs [RR=2.65 (95% CI, 1.26-5.56), < 0.01, I = 48%], there was no statistical significance in the pooled estimate for other secondary outcomes, including total adverse events, arrhythmia, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and cardiac arrest, acute mesenteric ischemia, ICU/hospital length of stay, and mechanical ventilation (MV) duration.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of vasopressin or its analogs was not associated with reduced 28-day or 30-day mortality among patients with septic shock, while an increased incidence of digital ischemia should be noted in patients receiving agonists for vasopressin receptors.

摘要

背景

血管加压素对感染性休克患者是一种有效的治疗药物,因为它在促进血流动力学稳定方面有很强的能力。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是比较血管加压素或其类似物与单独使用儿茶酚胺对感染性休克患者的临床疗效。

方法

截至2019年10月30日,对Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE和PubMed在线数据库进行系统检索,以确定比较血管加压素或其类似物(如特利加压素、司来加压素)与单独使用儿茶酚胺的随机对照试验。

结果

本研究纳入了23项随机对照试验,共4225例患者。与单独使用儿茶酚胺相比,血管加压素或其类似物的使用与感染性休克患者28天或30天死亡率的降低无关[风险比(RR)=0.94(95%置信区间,0.87-1.01),P=0.08,I²=0%]。进行敏感性分析后,主要终点结果保持不变。尽管接受血管加压素或其类似物的患者发生指端缺血的风险显著更高[RR=2.65(95%置信区间,1.26-5.56),P<0.01,I²=48%],但在其他次要结局的汇总估计中无统计学意义,包括总不良事件、心律失常、急性心肌梗死(AMI)和心脏骤停、急性肠系膜缺血、重症监护病房/医院住院时间以及机械通气(MV)持续时间。

结论

血管加压素或其类似物的使用与感染性休克患者28天或30天死亡率的降低无关,而接受血管加压素受体激动剂的患者应注意指端缺血发生率增加。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/097a/7218087/eba2820abfab/fphar-11-00563-g001.jpg

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