Aljuhani Ohoud, Al Sulaiman Khalid, Alkofide Hadeel, AlFaifi Mashael, Alshehri Asma A, Aljohani Sarah, Algethamy Haifa
Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Pharmaceutical Care Services, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Tob Induc Dis. 2024 Aug 6;22. doi: 10.18332/tid/190798. eCollection 2024.
The effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in critically ill patients remains uncertain, as conflicting research results have been reported. Despite potential side effects and inconsistent data on safety and efficacy, NRT is still prescribed in intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent withdrawal symptoms and manage agitation in patients who are smokers. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy in critically ill smoking patients.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the outcomes of smokers admitted to ICUs and were randomized either to receive or not receive nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) during their ICU stay. The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception through 13 February 2023 using OVID. The primary outcome was ICU length of stay (LOS) for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted using both random-effects and fixed-effect models; the latter is recommended when meta-analysis is restricted to just a few studies. The study was registered in the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under reference number CRD42023407804.
Of 28 studies initially identified, three, with 67 patients on NRT and 72 controls, were deemed eligible for pooled analysis. Patients who received NRT experienced a shorter LOS (mean difference, MD= -3.06; 95% CI: -5.88 - -0.25, p=0.0, I=0%). The mechanical ventilation (MV) duration was also shorter in the NRT group, but this difference was not statistically significant (MD= -1.24; 95% CI: -3.21-0.72, p=0.22, I=12.69%). Delirium duration was reported by two studies, from which pooled analysis revealed an MD of -0.50 (95% CI: -1.63-0.62, I=0%). The vasopressor duration was assessed in two studies, and the overall MD for vasopressor duration was not statistically different between NRT patients and controls in the fixed-effects model (MD=0.11; 95% CI: -0.75-0.96, I=0%).
Critically ill smoker patients who received NRT experienced a significantly shorter ICU LOS but no significant differences in the durations of MV, vasopressor use, or delirium.
尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)在重症患者中的有效性仍不确定,因为已有相互矛盾的研究结果报道。尽管存在潜在副作用以及关于安全性和有效性的数据不一致,但重症监护病房(ICU)仍会开具NRT处方,以预防吸烟者患者出现戒断症状并控制躁动。本荟萃分析旨在评估尼古丁替代疗法在重症吸烟患者中的有效性。
一项对随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析,调查了入住ICU的吸烟者在ICU住院期间随机接受或不接受尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)的结果。使用OVID从数据库建立至2023年2月13日对MEDLINE和Embase数据库进行检索。本系统评价和荟萃分析的主要结局是ICU住院时间(LOS)。采用随机效应模型和固定效应模型进行荟萃分析;当荟萃分析仅限于少数研究时,推荐使用后者。该研究已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO)注册,注册号为CRD42023407804。
在最初确定的28项研究中,有3项研究符合纳入汇总分析的条件,其中67例患者接受NRT治疗,72例为对照组。接受NRT治疗的患者住院时间较短(平均差,MD = -3.06;95%置信区间:-5.88至-0.25,p = 0.0,I² = 0%)。NRT组的机械通气(MV)持续时间也较短,但差异无统计学意义(MD = -1.24;95%置信区间:-3.21至0.72,p = 0.22,I² = 12.69%)。两项研究报告了谵妄持续时间,汇总分析显示平均差为-0.50(95%置信区间:-1.63至0.62,I² = 0%)。两项研究评估了血管升压药使用持续时间,在固定效应模型中,NRT组患者和对照组之间血管升压药使用持续时间的总体平均差无统计学差异(MD = 0.11;95%置信区间:-0.75至0.96,I² = 0%)。
接受NRT治疗的重症吸烟患者的ICU住院时间显著缩短,但MV持续时间﹑血管升压药使用持续时间或谵妄持续时间无显著差异。