Dataset Information

High-dose intravenous selenium does not improve clinical outcomes in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Selenium (Se) is an essential trace element with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory effects. So far, several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that parenteral Se may improve clinical outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Since publication of our previous systematic review and meta-analysis on antioxidants in the ICU, reports of several trials have been published, including the largest RCT on Se therapy. The purpose of the present systematic review was to update our previous data on intravenous (IV) Se in the critically ill.We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included RCTs with parallel groups comparing parenteral Se as single or combined therapy with placebo. Potential trials were evaluated according to specific eligibility criteria, and two reviewers abstracted data from original trials in duplicate independently. Overall mortality was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes were infections, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, ventilator days, and new renal dysfunction.A total of 21 RCTs met our inclusion criteria. When the data from these trials were aggregated, IV Se had no effect on mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.98, 95 % CI 0.90-1.08, P?=?0.72, heterogeneity I 2?=?0 %). In addition, when the results of ten trials in which researchers reported on infections were statistically aggregated, there was no significant treatment effect of parenteral Se (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.88-1.02, P?=?0.15, I 2?=?0 %). There was no positive or negative effect of Se therapy on ICU and hospital LOS, renal function, or ventilator days.In critically ill patients, IV Se as monotherapy does not improve clinical outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Manzanares W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5084353 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High-dose intravenous selenium does not improve clinical outcomes in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Manzanares William W Lemieux Margot M Elke Gunnar G Langlois Pascal L PL Bloos Frank F Heyland Daren K DK

Critical care (London, England) 20161028 1

<h4>Background</h4>Selenium (Se) is an essential trace element with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory effects. So far, several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that parenteral Se may improve clinical outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Since publication of our previous systematic review and meta-analysis on antioxidants in the ICU, reports of several trials have been published, including the largest RCT on Se therapy. The purpose of the present s ...[more]

PMID: 27788688

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt is currently unclear whether parenteral selenium supplementation should be recommended in the management of critically ill patients. Here we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of parenteral selenium supplementation on clinical outcomes.Methods/principal findingsRandomized trials investigating parenteral selenium supplementation administered in addition to standard of care to critically ill patients were included. CENTRAL, Medline, EMBASE, the Science Citation Index, and CINAHL were searched with complementary manual searches. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Trials published in any language were included. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. A third author was consulted to resolve disagreements and for quality assurance. Twelve trials were included and meta-analysis was performed on nine trials that recruited critically ill septic patients. These comprised 965 participants in total. Of these, 148 patients (30.7%) in the treatment groups, and 180 patients (37.3%) in control groups died. Parenteral selenium treatment significantly reduced all-cause mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis (relative risk [RR] 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.99, p = 0.04, I(2) = 0%). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the administration schedule employing longer duration (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.94, p = 0.01, I(2) = 0%), loading boluses (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.94, p = 0.01, I(2) = 0%) or high-dose selenium treatment (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.99, p = 0.04, I(2) = 0%) might be associated with a lower mortality risk. There was no evidence of adverse events.Conclusions/significanceParenteral selenium supplementation reduces risk of mortality among critically ill patients with sepsis. Owing to the varied methodological quality of the studies, future high-quality randomized trials that directly focus on the effect of adequate-duration of parenteral selenium supplementation for severe septic patients are needed to confirm our results. Clinicians should consider these findings when treating this high-risk population.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO 2011; CRD42011001768.

Project description:PurposeSelenium supplementation is a potentially promising adjunctive therapy for critically ill patients, but the results are controversy among studies. Accordingly, we performed this meta-analysis to more clearly detect the efficacy and safety of selenium supplementation on critically ill patients.MethodsSystematic literature retrieval was carried out to obtain RCTs on selenium supplementation for critically ill patients up to August 2017. Data extraction and quality evaluation of these studies were performed by 2 investigators. Statistical analyses was performed by RevMan 5.3. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted to control the risks of type I and type II errors and calculate required information size (RIS).ResultsTotally 19 RCTs involving 3341 critically ill patients were carried out in which 1694 participates were in the selenium supplementation group, and 1647 in the control. The aggregated results suggested that compared with the control, intravenous selenium supplement as a single therapy could decrease the total mortality (RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.78-0.95, P = .002, TSA-adjusted 95% CI = 0.77-0.96, RIS = 4108, n = 3297) and may shorten the length of stay in hospital (MD -2.30, 95% CI -4.03 to -0.57, P = .009), but had no significant treatment effect on 28-days mortality (RR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.85-1.09, P = .54) and could not shorten the length of ICU stay (MD -0.15, 95% CI -1.68 to 1.38, P = .84) in critically ill patients. Our results also showed that selenium supplementation did not increase incidence of drug-induced side effect compared with the control (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.30, P = .73).ConclusionsThe current evidence suggests that the use of selenium could reduce the total mortality, and TSA results showed that our outcome is reliable and no more randomized controlled trials are needed. But selenium supplementation might have no effect on reducing 28-days mortality as well as the incidence of new infections, or on length of stay in ICU or mechanical ventilation. However, the results should be used carefully because of potential limitations.

Project description:ObjectivesDetermine effect of mental health interventions on psychologic outcomes in informal caregivers of critically ill patients.Data sourcesSearches conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and other databases from inception to October 31, 2019.Study selectionInterventions for informal caregivers of critically ill patients in adult ICU, PICU, or neonatal ICU.Data extractionTwo independent, blinded reviewers screened citations and extracted data. Random-effects models with inverse variance weighting pooled outcome data when suitable. Psychologic outcomes categorized: 1) negative (anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, distress, and burden) or 2) positive (courage, humanity, justice, transcendence, temperance, and wisdom and knowledge). Stratification according to intervention type and patient population was performed.Data synthesisOf 11,201 studies, 102 interventional trials were included (n = 12,676 informal caregivers). Interventions targeted caregiver experience (n = 58), role (n = 6), or support (n = 38). Meta-analysis (56 randomized controlled trials; n = 22 [39%] in adult ICUs; n = 34 [61%] in neonatal ICU or PICU) demonstrated reduced anxiety (ratio of means = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97) and depression (ratio of means = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-0.99), but not post-traumatic stress disorder (ratio of means = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.80-1.04) or distress (ratio of means = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.95-1.07) among informal caregivers randomized to mental health interventions compared with controls within 3 months post-ICU discharge. Increased humanity (ratio of means = 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.15), transcendence (ratio of means = 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.15), and caregiver burden (ratio of means = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12) were observed. No significant effects of mental health interventions observed after 3 months postdischarge.ConclusionsMental health interventions for caregivers of critically ill patients improved short-term anxiety, depression, humanity, and transcendence while increasing burden. Clinicians should consider short-term prescriptions of mental health interventions to informal caregivers of critically ill patients with capacity to manage interventions.

Project description:Objective Nitrogen balance (NB) is a commonly used nutrition indicator in clinical practice, while its relation to the interpretation of protein malnutrition and outcomes in critically ill patients remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of NB on prognosis in such a patient population. Methods We searched for relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database up to May 10, 2022. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between NB (initial, final, or absolute change of NB levels) and prognosis and important clinical outcomes in critically ill patients. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) together with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. We also conducted subgroup analyses to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Results Eight studies with 1,409 patients were eligible. These studies were moderate to high quality. When pooled, the initial NB was comparable between the survival and non-survival groups (five studies, MD 1.20, 95% CI, −0.70 to 3.11, I2 = 77%; P = 0.22), while a significantly higher final NB in the survival group than that in the death group (two studies, MD 3.69, 95% CI, 1.92–5.46, I2 = 55%; P < 0.0001). Two studies provided the absolute change of NB over time and suggested survival patients had more increased NB (MD 4.16 g/day, 95% CI, 3.70–4.61, I2 = 0%; P < 0.00001). Similarly, for studies utilizing multivariate logistic regression, we found an improved NB (four studies, OR 0.85, 95% CI, 0.73–0.99, I2 = 61%; P = 0.04) but not an initial NB (two studies, OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.78–1.08, I2 = 55%; P = 0.31) was significantly associated the risk of all-cause mortality. These results were further confirmed in subgroup analyses. In addition, patients with improved NB had more protein and calorie intake and a similar length of stay in hospital than those without. Conclusions Our results suggested that an improved NB but not the initial NB level was associated with all-cause mortality in critically ill patients. This highlights the requirement for dynamic monitoring of NB during nutrition treatment. Further randomized clinical trials examining the impact of NB-guided protein intake on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients are warranted. Systematic review registration INPLASY202250134, https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2022.5.0134.

Project description:BackgroundWe performed a systematic review of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, which analysed the effect of tracheostomy timing and technique (surgical vs percutaneous) on mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), decannulation from tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation, and complications.MethodsFour databases were screened between January 1, 2020 and January 10, 2022 (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane). Papers were selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Population or Problem, Intervention or exposure, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) guidelines. Meta-analysis and meta-regression for main outcomes were performed.ResultsThe search yielded 9024 potentially relevant studies, of which 47 (n=5268 patients) were included. High levels of between-study heterogeneity were observed across study outcomes. The pooled mean tracheostomy timing was 16.5 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.7-18.4; I2=99.6%). Pooled mortality was 22.1% (95% CI: 18.7-25.5; I2=89.0%). Meta-regression did not show significant associations between mortality and tracheostomy timing, mechanical ventilation duration, time to decannulation, and tracheostomy technique. Pooled mean estimates for ICU and hospital LOS were 29.6 (95% CI: 24.0-35.2; I2=98.6%) and 38.8 (95% CI: 32.1-45.6; I2=95.7%) days, both associated with mechanical ventilation duration (coefficient 0.8 [95% CI: 0.2-1.4], P=0.02 and 0.9 [95% CI: 0.4-1.4], P=0.01, respectively) but not tracheostomy timing. Data were insufficient to assess tracheostomy technique on LOS. Duration of mechanical ventilation was 23.4 days (95% CI: 19.2-27.7; I2=99.3%), not associated with tracheostomy timing. Data were insufficient to assess the effect of tracheostomy technique on mechanical ventilation duration. Time to decannulation was 23.8 days (95% CI: 19.7-27.8; I2=98.7%), not influenced by tracheostomy timing or technique. The most common complications were stoma infection, ulcers or necrosis, and bleeding.ConclusionsIn patients with COVID-19 requiring tracheostomy, the timing and technique of tracheostomy did not clearly impact on patient outcomes.Systematic review protocolPROSPERO CRD42021272220.

Project description:ImportanceOxygen supplementation is a cornerstone treatment in pediatric critical care. Accumulating evidence suggests that overzealous use of oxygen, leading to hyperoxia, is associated with worse outcomes compared with patients with normoxia.ObjectivesTo evaluate the association of arterial hyperoxia with clinical outcome in critically ill children among studies using varied definitions of hyperoxia.Data sourcesA systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to February 1, 2021, was conducted.Study selectionClinical trials or observational studies of children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit that examined hyperoxia, by any definition, and described at least 1 outcome of interest. No language restrictions were applied.Data extraction and synthesisThe Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guideline and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for study quality assessment were used. The review process was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Data were pooled with a random-effects model.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 28-day mortality; this time was converted to mortality at the longest follow-up owing to insufficient studies reporting the initial primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, ventilator-related outcomes, extracorporeal organ support, and functional performance.ResultsIn this systematic review, 16 studies (27 555 patients) were included. All, except 1 randomized clinical pilot trial, were observational cohort studies. Study populations included were post-cardiac arrest (n = 6), traumatic brain injury (n = 1), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 2), and general critical care (n = 7). Definitions and assessment of hyperoxia differed among included studies. Partial pressure of arterial oxygen was most frequently used to define hyperoxia and mainly by categorical cutoff. In total, 11 studies (23 204 patients) were pooled for meta-analysis. Hyperoxia, by any definition, showed an odds ratio of 1.59 (95% CI, 1.00-2.51; after Hartung-Knapp adjustment, 95% CI, 1.05-2.38) for mortality with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 92%). This association was also found in less heterogeneous subsets. A signal of harm was observed at higher thresholds of arterial oxygen levels when grouped by definition of hyperoxia. Secondary outcomes were inadequate for meta-analysis.Conclusions and relevanceThese results suggest that, despite methodologic limitations of the studies, hyperoxia is associated with mortality in critically ill children. This finding identifies the further need for prospective observational studies and importance to address the clinical implications of hyperoxia in critically ill children.

Dataset Information

High-dose intravenous selenium does not improve clinical outcomes in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

High-dose intravenous selenium does not improve clinical outcomes in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets