Dataset Information

Effects of dexmedetomidine on delirium and mortality during sedation in ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Delirium is very common in patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), and may worsen survival in these patients. Several meta-analyses have evaluated the antidelirium effects of dexmedetomidine in ICU patients, but their findings were inconsistent. Recently, several large multicentre randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were published, but they have not yet to be included in any meta-analysis. We will conduct a meta-analysis adding these data to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine on delirium and mortality in ICU patients, aiming to terminate controversy and provide robust evidence for guiding clinical practice.

Methods and analysis

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science will be searched from inception to 31 December 2018 for relevant RCTs. Two reviewers will independently screen the identified citations. After quality appraisal and data extraction of included studies, we will conduct meta-analyses for outcomes of interest, including delirium, mortality, length of ICU/hospital stay, time to extubation, ICU costs and adverse effects. The statistical heterogeneity among studies will be assessed by the ?² test and quantified by the I² statistics. We will undertake subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses to evaluate whether the results are robust. Potential publication bias will be assessed by funnel plot and Egger's test. At last, the quality of evidence of the main outcomes will be rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

Ethics and dissemination

The present study is a meta-analysis based on published studies, thus ethical approval is not needed. Our review will elucidate whether dexmedetomidine could decrease the incidence of delirium and improve survival in ICU patients. Our findings may help clinicians to choose optimal sedative agents for ICU patients. The results of this meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal for publication.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018095358.

SUBMITTER: Sun R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6500184 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of dexmedetomidine on delirium and mortality during sedation in ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Sun Rao R Wang Shuo S Li Shiyong S Yang Chun C Zhao Yilin Y Luo Ailin A

BMJ open 20190403 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Delirium is very common in patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), and may worsen survival in these patients. Several meta-analyses have evaluated the antidelirium effects of dexmedetomidine in ICU patients, but their findings were inconsistent. Recently, several large multicentre randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were published, but they have not yet to be included in any meta-analysis. We will conduct a meta-analysis adding these data to evaluate the effects of dex ...[more]

PMID: 30948590

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUse of sedatives and analgesics is associated with the occurrence of delirium in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Dexmedetomidine reduces the occurrence of delirium but may cause hypotension, bradycardia, and insufficient sedation. This substudy aims to determine whether the combination of esketamine with dexmedetomidine can reduce the side effects and risk of delirium than dexmedetomidine alone in mechanically ventilated patients.MethodsThis single-center, randomized, active-controlled, superiority trial will be conducted at The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. A total of 134 mechanically ventilated patients will be recruited and randomized to receive either dexmedetomidine alone or esketamine combined with dexmedetomidine, until extubation or for a maximum of 14 days. The primary outcome is the occurrence of delirium, while the second outcomes include the number of delirium-free days; subtype, severity, and duration of delirium; time to first onset of delirium; total dose of vasopressors and antipsychotics; duration of mechanical ventilation; ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS); accidental extubation, re-intubation, re-admission; and mortality in the ICU at 14 and 28 days.DiscussionThere is an urgent need for a new combination regimen of dexmedetomidine due to its evident side effects. The combination of esketamine and dexmedetomidine has been applied throughout the perioperative period. However, there is still a lack of evidence on the effects of this regimen on delirium in mechanically ventilated ICU patients. This substudy will evaluate the effects of the combination of esketamine and dexmedetomidine in reducing the risk of delirium for mechanically ventilated patients in ICU, thus providing evidence of this combination to improve the short-term prognosis. The study protocol has obtained approval from the Medical Ethics Committee (ID: 2022-SR-450).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05466708, registered on 20 July 2022.

Project description:BackgroundDelirium during intensive care unit (ICU) stay is frequent and associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare-related costs. International guidelines suggest its prevention. However, curative treatment remains unclearly established. Despite contradictory and ambiguous academic literature, international guidelines suggest the use of second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics over haloperidol. However, haloperidol remains the most widely used neuroleptic worldwide as a first-line treatment of agitation and/or delirium. Dexmedetomidine, an alpha2-adrenergic receptors agonist, has shown its efficiency in the treatment of delirium in intubated patients but also in its prevention. Dexmedetomidine represents a widely used alternative to haloperidol. Only few studies have compared the efficacy of dexmedetomidine in non-intubated ICU patients as a first-line curative treatment of delirium. The main objective of the 4D trial is to demonstrate that dexmedetomidine decreases delirium duration compared to placebo.Methods/designThe 4D trial is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, two-arm trial, randomizing 300 non-intubated ICU patients with a diagnosis of agitated delirium to receive dexmedetomidine or placebo as a cure. In case of agitation (RASS??+?2), immediate haloperidol administration will be allowed, to protect patient and staff in charge, while waiting for study treatment action. The primary outcome measure is a composite of duration of agitation or delirium or the use of intubation with deep sedation and mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes include mortalities at 7 and 30 days, ICU length of stay and occurrence of adverse effects related to dexmedetomidine use (bradycardia or hypotension requesting any treatment; or haloperidol use (neuroleptic malignant syndrome, extrapyramidal syndrome, prolonged QTc). The sample size will allow the detection of a 50% decrease of agitation duration (120 min), of an absolute reduction of delirium duration (1 day) and of a 50% relative decrease of intubation and mechanical ventilation, with a type 1 error rate of 1.8% (error risk inflation due to components of composite) and power of 90%, assuming a 15% incidence of intubation and mechanical ventilation requirements, an agitation duration of 240 min and a delirium duration of 3 days. One hundred and ten patients by group will be needed. An intermediate analysis is scheduled and requires the inclusion of 150 patients.DiscussionThe 4D trial may provide important data on the safety of commonly used sedative dexmedetomidine and could have a significant impact on future treatment of non-intubated ICU patients presenting with agitated delirium.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , ID: NCT 03317067 . Registered on 23 October 2017.

Project description:BackgroundAs an atypical antipsychotic drug, olanzapine is one of the most commonly used drugs for delirium control. There are no systematic evaluations or meta-analyses of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for delirium control in critically ill adults.ObjectivesIn this meta-analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for delirium control in critically ill adults in the intensive care unit (ICU).Data sources and methodsFrom inception to October 2022, 12 electronic databases were searched. We retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies of critically ill adults with delirium that compared the effects of olanzapine and other interventions, including routine care (no intervention), nonpharmaceutical interventions and pharmaceutical interventions. The main outcome measures were the (a) relief of delirium symptoms and (b) a decrease in delirium duration. Secondary outcomes were ICU and in-hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, incidence of adverse events, cognitive function, sleep quality, quality of life, mechanical ventilation time, endotracheal intubation rate and delirium recurrence rate. We applied a random effects model.ResultsData from 10 studies (four RCTs and six retrospective cohort studies) involving 7076 patients (2459 in the olanzapine group and 4617 in the control group) were included. Olanzapine did not effectively relieve delirium symptoms (OR = 1.36, 95% CI [0.83, 2.28], p = 0.21), nor did it shorten the duration of delirium [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.02, 95% CI [-1.04, 1.09], p = 0.97] when compared with other interventions. Pooled data from three studies showed that the use of olanzapine reduced the incidence of hypotension (OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.20, 0.95], p = 0.04) compared with other pharmaceuticals. There was no significant difference in other secondary outcomes, including ICU or hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, extrapyramidal reactions, QTc interval prolongation, or overall incidence of other adverse reactions. The number of included studies was not sufficient for performing a comparison between olanzapine and no intervention.ConclusionCompared with other interventions, olanzapine has no advantage in alleviating delirium symptoms and shortening delirium duration in critically ill adults. However, there is some evidence that the rate of hypotension was lower in patients who received olanzapine than in those who received other pharmaceutical interventions. There was a nonsignificant difference in the length of ICU or hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, and other adverse reactions. This study provides reference data for delirium research and clinical drug intervention strategies in critically ill adults.RegistrationProspective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42021277232).

Project description:BACKGROUND:To determine the preventive and therapeutic effect of dexmedetomidine on intensive care unit (ICU) delirium. METHODS:The literature search using PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed (August 1, 2018) to detect all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult ICU patients receiving dexmedetomidine. Articles were included if they assessed the influence of dexmedetomidine compared to a sedative agent on incidence of ICU delirium or treatment of this syndrome. Accordingly, relevant articles were allocated to the following two groups: (1) articles that assessed the delirium incidence (incidence comparison) or articles that assessed the treatment of delirium (treatment comparison). Incidence of delirium and delirium resolution were the primary outcomes. We combined treatment effects comparing dexmedetomidine versus (1) placebo, (2) standard sedatives, and (3) opioids in random-effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias for each included RCT was assessed following Cochrane standards. RESULTS:The literature search resulted in 28 articles (25 articles/4975 patients for the incidence comparison and three articles/166 patients for the treatment comparison). In the incidence comparison, heterogeneity was present in different subgroups. Administration of dexmedetomidine was associated with significantly lower overall incidence of delirium when compared to placebo (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.39-0.70; I2?=?37%), standard sedatives (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.46-0.86; I2?=?69%), as well as to opioids (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; I2?=?0%). Use of dexmedetomidine significantly increased the risks of bradycardia and hypotension. Limited data were available on circulatory insufficiency and mortality. In the treatment comparison, the comparison drugs in the three RCTs were placebo, midazolam, and haloperidol. The resolution of delirium was measured differently in each study. Two out of the three studies indicated clear favorable effects for dexmedetomidine (i.e., compared to placebo and midazolam). The study comparing dexmedetomidine with haloperidol was a pilot study (n?=?20) with high variability in the results. CONCLUSION:Findings suggest that dexmedetomidine reduces incidence and duration of ICU delirium. Furthermore, our systematic searches show that there is limited evidence if a delirium shall be treated with dexmedetomidine.

Project description:ObjectivesWe reviewed randomized trials of adult ICU patients of interventions hypothesized to reduce delirium burden to determine whether interventions that are more effective at reducing delirium duration are associated with a reduction in short-term mortality.Data sourcesWe searched CINHAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane databases from 2001 to 2012.Study selectionCitations were screened for randomized trials that enrolled critically ill adults, evaluated delirium at least daily, compared a drug or nondrug intervention hypothesized to reduce delirium burden with standard care (or control), and reported delirium duration and/or short-term mortality (≤ 45 d).Data extractionIn duplicate, we abstracted trial characteristics and results and evaluated quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We performed random effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions.Data synthesisWe included 17 trials enrolling 2,849 patients which evaluated a pharmacologic intervention (n = 13) (dexmedetomidine [n = 6], an antipsychotic [n = 4], rivastigmine [n = 2], and clonidine [n = 1]), a multimodal intervention (n = 2) (spontaneous awakening [n = 2]), or a nonpharmacologic intervention (n = 2) (early mobilization [n = 1] and increased perfusion [n = 1]). Overall, average delirium duration was lower in the intervention groups (difference = -0.64 d; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.13; p = 0.01) being reduced by more than or equal to 3 days in three studies, 0.1 to less than 3 days in six studies, 0 day in seven studies, and less than 0 day in one study. Across interventions, for 13 studies where short-term mortality was reported, short-term mortality was not reduced (risk ratio = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.06; p = 0.19). Across 13 studies that reported mortality, meta-regression revealed that delirium duration was not associated with reduced short-term mortality (p = 0.11).ConclusionsA review of current evidence fails to support that ICU interventions that reduce delirium duration reduce short-term mortality. Larger controlled studies are needed to establish this relationship.

Dataset Information

Effects of dexmedetomidine on delirium and mortality during sedation in ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Effects of dexmedetomidine on delirium and mortality during sedation in ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets