Ketamine for critically ill patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of randomised clinical trials
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
Intensive care for patients with severe acute brain injury aims both to treat the immediate consequences of the injury and to prevent and treat secondary brain injury to ensure a good functional outcome. Sedation may be used to facilitate mechanical ventilation, for treating agitation, and for controlling intracranial pressure. Ketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist with sedative, analgesic, and potentially neuroprotective properties. We describe a protocol for a systematic review of randomised clinical trials assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of ketamine for patients with severe acute brain injury. Methods and analysis
We will systematically search international databases for randomised clinical trials, including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries. Two authors will independently review and select trials for inclusion, and extract data. We will compare ketamine by any regimen versus placebo, no intervention, or other sedatives or analgesics for patients with severe acute brain injury. The primary outcomes will be functional outcome at maximal follow up, quality of life, and serious adverse events. We will also assess secondary and exploratory outcomes. The extracted data will be analysed using Review Manager and Trials Sequential Analysis. Evidence certainty will be graded using GRADE. Ethics and dissemination
The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice. PROSPERO no
CRD42021210447.
SUBMITTER: Madsen F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8592463 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionMilrinone is an inotrope widely used for treatment of cardiac failure. Because previous meta-analyses had methodological flaws, we decided to conduct a systematic review of the effect of milrinone in critically ill adult patients with cardiac dysfunction.MethodsThis systematic review was performed according to The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Searches were conducted until November 2015. Patients with cardiac dysfunction were included. The primary outcome was serious adverse events (SAE) including mortality at maximum follow-up. The risk of bias was evaluated and trial sequential analyses were conducted. The quality of evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria.ResultsA total of 31 randomised clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria, of which 16 provided data for our analyses. All trials were at high risk of bias, and none reported the primary composite outcome SAE. Fourteen trials with 1611 randomised patients reported mortality data at maximum follow-up (RR 0.96; 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.21). Milrinone did not significantly affect other patient-centred outcomes. All analyses displayed statistical and/or clinical heterogeneity of patients, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and/or settings and all featured missing data.DiscussionThe current evidence on the use of milrinone in critically ill adult patients with cardiac dysfunction suffers from considerable risks of both bias and random error and demonstrates no benefits. The use of milrinone for the treatment of critically ill patients with cardiac dysfunction can be neither recommended nor refuted. Future randomised clinical trials need to be sufficiently large and designed to have low risk of bias.
| S-EPMC4992029 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is frequent in Coronavirus Infection Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Factors associated with AKI in COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) patients and their outcomes have not been previously explored.MethodsProspective observational study of COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICUs of the Hospital Clínic of Barcelona (Spain), from March 25th to April 21st, 2020, who developed AKI stage 2 or higher (AKIN classification). The primary goal was to describe the characteristics of moderate-severe AKI of COVID-19 patients in an ICU context. As a secondary goal, we aimed to find independent predictors of AKI progression, Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT) requirement and mortality among these patients.ResultsDuring the study period, 52 out of 237 ICU patients, developed AKIN stage 2 or higher and were included in the study. A Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at AKI diagnosis of 8 or higher was associated with RRT, OR 5.2, p 0.032. At the time of AKI diagnosis, patients had a worse liver profile and higher inflammation markers than at admission. Fifty per cent of the patients presented AKI progression from AKIN 2 to 3 and 28.85% required RRT. The use of corticosteroids in 69.2% of patients was associated with a reduced requirement of RRT, OR 0.13 (CI 95% 0.02-0.89), p 0.037. AKI was associated with high mortality (50%) and a longer hospital stay, median 35 vs 18 days (p 0.024).ConclusionsThe prevalence of moderate/severe AKI in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU is high and has a strong correlation with mortality and length of hospital stay.
| S-EPMC7776310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWhen both severe metabolic acidemia (pH equal or less than 7.20; PaCO2 equal or less than 45 mm Hg and bicarbonate concentration equal or less than of 20 mmol/L) and moderate-to-severe acute kidney injury are observed, day 28 mortality is approximately 55%-60%. A multiple centre randomised clinical trial (BICARICU-1) has suggested that sodium bicarbonate infusion titrated to maintain the pH equal or more than 7.30 is associated with a higher survival rate (secondary endpoint) in a prespecified stratum of patients with both severe metabolic acidemia and acute kidney injury patients. Whether sodium bicarbonate infusion may improve survival at day 90 (primary outcome) in these severe acute kidney injury patients is currently unknown.Methods and analysisThe sodium bicarbonate for the treatment of severe metabolic acidosis with moderate or severe acute kidney injury in the critically ill: a randomised clinical trial (BICARICU-2) trial is an investigator-initiated, multiple centre, stratified, parallel-group, unblinded trial with a computer-generated allocation sequence and an electronic system-based randomisation. After randomisation, the intervention group will receive 4.2% sodium bicarbonate infusion to target a plasma pH equal or more than 7.30 while the control group will not receive sodium bicarbonate. The primary outcome is the day 90 mortality. Main secondary outcomes are organ support dependences.Ethics and disseminationThe trial has been approved by the appropriate ethics committee (CPP Nord Ouest, Rouen, France, 25 April 2019, number: 19.03.15.72446). Informed consent is required. If sodium bicarbonate improves day 90 mortality, it will become part of the routine care.Trial registration numberNCT04010630.
| S-EPMC10441043 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The efficacy and safety of early renal replacement therapy (eRRT) for critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remain controversial. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to perform an up-to-date meta-analysis with the trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the therapeutic effect of eRRT on patients in an intensive care unit (ICU). We extensively searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov, Gray Literature Report, and Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE), and conducted an updated search on December 27, 2021. The included studies were RCTs, which compared the efficacy and safety of eRRT and delayed renal replacement therapy (dRRT) on critically ill patients with AKI. We adopted TSA and sensitivity analysis to strengthen the robustness of the results. About 12 RCTs with a total of 5,423 participants were included. Patients receiving eRRT and dRRT had the similar rate of all-cause mortality at day 28 (38.7% vs. 38.9%) [risk ratio (RR), 1.00; 95%CI, 0.93-1.07, p = 0.93, I 2 = 0%, p = 0.93]. A sensitivity and subgroup analysis produced similar results for the primary outcome. TSA showed that the required information size was 5,034, and the cumulative Z-curve crossed trial sequential monitoring boundaries for futility. Patients receiving eRRT had a higher rate of renal replacement therapy (RRT) (RR, 1.50, 95% CI: 1.28-1.76, p < 0.00001, I 2 = 96%), and experienced more adverse events comparing to those receiving dRRT (RR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.22-1.63, p < 0.0001, heterogeneity not applied). The most remarkable and important experimental finding is that, to our knowledge, the current meta-analysis included the largest sample size from the RCTs, which were published in the past 10 years to date, show that eRRT had no significant survival benefit for ill patients with AKI compared with dRRT and TSA indicating that no more studies were needed to confirm it.Trial registrationINPLASY, INPLASY2020120030. Registered 04 December 2020.
| S-EPMC8898954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is a common serious complication in critically ill patients. AKI occurs in up to 50% patients in intensive care unit (ICU), with poor clinical prognosis. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) has been widely used in critically ill patients with AKI. However, in patients without urgent indications such as acute pulmonary edema, severe acidosis, and severe hyperkalemia, the optimal timing of RRT initiation is still under debate. We conducted this systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) to compare the effects of early RRT initiation versus delayed RRT initiation.MethodsWe searched databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) from inception through to July 20, 2020, to identify eligible RCTs. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Two authors extracted the data independently. When the I2 values < 25%, we used fixed-effect mode. Otherwise, the random effects model was used as appropriate. TSA was performed to control the risk of random errors and assess whether the results in our meta-analysis were conclusive.ResultsEleven studies involving 5086 patients were identified. Two studies included patients with sepsis, one study included patients with shock after cardiac surgery, and eight others included mixed populations. The criteria for the initiation of RRT, the definition of AKI, and RRT modalities existed great variations among the studies. The median time of RRT initiation across studies ranged from 2 to 7.6 h in the early RRT group and 21 to 57 h in the delayed RRT group. The pooled results showed that early initiation of RRT could not decrease 28-day all-cause mortality compared with delayed RRT (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.94-1.09; P = 0.77; I2 = 0%). TSA result showed that the required information size was 2949. The cumulative Z curve crossed the futility boundary and reached the required information size. In addition, early initiation of RRT could lead to unnecessary RRT exposure in some patients and was associated with a higher incidence of hypotension (RR 1.42; 95% CI 1.23-1.63; P < 0.00001; I2 = 8%) and RRT-associated infection events (RR 1.34; 95% CI 1.01-1.78; P = 0.04; I2 = 0%).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggested that early initiation of RRT was not associated with survival benefit in critically ill patients with AKI. In addition, early initiation of RRT could lead to unnecessary RRT exposure in some patients, resulting in a waste of health resources and a higher incidence of RRT-associated adverse events. Maybe, only critically ill patients with a clear and hard indication, such as severe acidosis, pulmonary edema, and hyperkalemia, could benefit from early initiation of RRT.
| S-EPMC7789484 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFrailty status among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is not well described despite its importance for prognostication and informed decision-making on life-sustaining therapies. In this study, we aim to describe the epidemiology of frailty in a cohort of older critically ill patients with severe AKI, the outcomes of patients with pre-existing frailty before AKI and the factors associated with a worsening frailty status among survivors.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of a prospective multicentre observational study that enrolled older (age > 65 years) critically ill patients with AKI. The clinical frailty scale (CFS) score was captured at baseline, at 6 months and at 12 months among survivors. Frailty was defined as a CFS score of ≥ 5. Demographic, clinical and physiological variables associated with frailty as baseline were described. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to describe the association between frailty and 90-day mortality. Demographic and clinical factors associated with worsening frailty status at 6 months and 12 months were described using multivariable logistic regression analysis and multistate models.ResultsAmong the 462 patients in our cohort, median (IQR) baseline CFS score was 4 (3-5), with 141 (31%) patients considered frail. Pre-existing frailty was associated with greater hazard of 90-day mortality (59% (n = 83) for frail vs. 31% (n = 100) for non-frail; adjusted hazards ratio [HR] 1.49; 95% CI 1.11-2.01, p = 0.008). At 6 months, 68 patients (28% of survivors) were frail. Of these, 57% (n = 39) were not classified as frail at baseline. Between 6 and 12 months of follow-up, 9 (4% of survivors) patients transitioned from a frail to a not frail status while 10 (4% of survivors) patients became frail and 11 (5% of survivors) patients died. In multivariable analysis, age was independently associated with worsening CFS score from baseline to 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% CI 1.03-1.13, p = 0.003).ConclusionsPre-existing frailty is an independent risk factor for mortality among older critically ill patients with severe AKI. A substantial proportion of survivors experience declining function and worsened frailty status within one year.
| S-EPMC7908639 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIt is standard of care to provide sedation to critically ill patients to reduce anxiety, discomfort and promote tolerance of mechanical ventilation. Given that sedatives can have differing effects based on a variety of patient and pharmacological characteristics, treatment approaches are largely based on targeting the level of sedation. The benefits of differing levels of sedation must be balanced against potential adverse effects including haemodynamic instability, causing delirium, delaying awakening and prolonging the time of mechanical ventilation and intensive care stay. This systematic review with meta-analysis aims to investigate the current evidence and compare the effects of differing sedation levels in adult critically ill patients.Methods and analysesWe will conduct a systematic review based on searches of preidentified major medical databases (eg, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries from their inception onwards to identify trials meeting inclusion criteria. We will include randomised clinical trials comparing any degree of sedation with no sedation and lighter sedation with deeper sedation for critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit. We will include aggregate data meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses. Risk of bias will be assessed with domains based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool. An eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed using Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.Ethics and disseminationNo formal approval or review of ethics is required as individual patient data will not be included. This systematic review has the potential to highlight (1) whether one should believe sedation to be beneficial, harmful or neither in critically ill adults; (2) the existing knowledge gaps and (3) whether the recommendations from guidelines and daily clinical practice are supported by current evidence. These results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
| S-EPMC9462111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Malnutrition is common in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) and the risk of mortality is high, especially if renal replacement therapy is needed. Between April 2013 through April 2014, we recruited critically ill adult patients (≥18 years) with severe AKI in two University hospitals in London, UK, and measured serial plasma concentrations of vitamin B1, B6, B12, C and D, folate, selenium, zinc, copper, iron, carnitine and 22 amino acids for six consecutive days. In patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), the concentrations of the same nutrients in the effluent were also determined. CRRT patients (n = 31) had lower plasma concentrations of citrulline, glutamic acid and carnitine at 24 hrs after enrolment and significantly lower plasma glutamic acid concentrations (74.4 versus 98.2 μmol/L) at day 6 compared to non-CRRT patients (n = 24). All amino acids, trace elements, vitamin C and folate were detectable in effluent fluid. In >30% of CRRT and non-CRRT patients, the plasma nutrient concentrations of zinc, iron, selenium, vitamin D3, vitamin C, trytophan, taurine, histidine and hydroxyproline were below the reference range throughout the 6-day period. In conclusion, altered micronutrient status is common in patients with severe AKI regardless of treatment with CRRT.
| S-EPMC6992767 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntravenous crystalloid solutions are administered commonly for critically ill patients. We performed this meta-analysis of randomized trials with trial sequential analysis (TSA) to evaluate effects of chloride content of intravenous crystalloid solutions on clinical outcomes among critically ill adult patients.MethodsElectronic databases were searched up to June 1, 2018, for randomized trials of use of balanced crystalloids versus 0.9% saline solutions in critically ill adult patients. The outcome variables included mortality, renal outcomes, serum content alterations and organ function. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to patient settings, types or volume of crystalloid fluid, or among sepsis versus non-sepsis, TBI versus non-TBI or subpopulations by the categories of baseline kidney function. Random errors were evaluated by trial sequential analysis.ResultsEight studies with 19,301 patients were analyzed. A trend of in-hospital survival benefit with no statistical difference could be observed with balanced crystalloids compared with 0.9% saline (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-1.0, p = 0.06). The use of balanced crystalloid solutions was associated with longer RRT-free days (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.12, p < 0.001), less risk of increase in serum concentrations of chloride (SMD - 1.23, 95% CI - 1.59 to - 0.87, p < 0.001) and sodium (SMD - 1.28, 95% CI - 1.65 to - 0.92, p < 0.001), less risk of decline in serum base deficit (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.98 to - 0.18, p = 0.004), longer ventilator-free days (SMD 0.08, 95% CI 0.05-0.11, p < 0.001) and vasopressor-free days (SMD 0.04, 95% CI 0.00-0.07, p = 0.02). Subgroup analysis showed that balanced crystalloid solutions were associated with a reduced in-hospital mortality rate among septic patients (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98; p = 0.02) and non-traumatic brain injury patients (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82-0.99, p = 0.02), while the TSA results indicated a larger sample size is still in need.ConclusionsLimited evidence supported statistical survival benefit with balanced crystalloid solutions, while it benefited in reducing organ support duration and fluctuations in serum electrolyte and base excess and was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality in subpopulation with sepsis and non-TBI. Large-scale rigorous randomized trials with better designs are needed to provide robust evidence for clinical management. Trial registration The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42018102661), https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails.
| S-EPMC6374495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:antipyretic therapy for patients with sepsis has long been debated. The present study aimed to explore the beneficial effect of antipyretic therapy for ICU patients with sepsis.systematic review and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.Pubmed, Scopus, EBSCO and EMBASE were searched from inception to August 5, 2014.Mortality was dichotomized as binary outcome variable and odds ratio (OR) was chosen to be the summary statistic. Pooled OR was calculated by using DerSimonian and Laird method. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by using the statistic I2. Trial sequential analysis was performed to account for the small number of trials and patients.A total of 6 randomized controlled trials including 819 patients were included into final analysis. Overall, there was no beneficial effect of antipyretic therapy on mortality risk in patients with established sepsis (OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.50-2.05). The required information size (IS) was 2582 and our analysis has not yet reached half of the IS. The Z-curve did not cross the O'Brien-Fleming ?-spending boundary or reach the futility, indicating that the non-significant result was probably due to lack of statistical power.our study fails to identify any beneficial effect of antipyretic therapy on ICU patients with established diagnosis of sepsis. Due to limited number of total participants, more studies are needed to make a conclusive and reliable analysis.
| S-EPMC4339198 | biostudies-literature