Corrigendum: Corticosteroids for Treating Sepsis in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Liang H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8603401 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveCorticosteroids are a common option used in sepsis treatment. However, the efficacy and potential risk of corticosteroids in septic patients have not been well assessed. This review was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of corticosteroids on patients with sepsis were included. The quality of outcomes in the included articles was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. The data were pooled by using risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD). The random-effects model was used to evaluate the pooled MD or RR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsFifty RCTs that included 12,304 patients with sepsis were identified. Corticosteroids were not associated with the mortality in 28-day (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87-1.02; evidence rank, moderate) and long-term mortality (>60 days) (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88-1.05) in patients with sepsis (evidence rank, low). However, corticosteroids may exert a significant effect on the mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97), in-hospital (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.82-0.99; evidence rank, moderate) in patients with sepsis or septic shock (evidence rank, low). Furthermore, corticosteroids probably achieved a tiny reduction in the length of hospital stay and ICU. Corticosteroids were associated with a higher risk of hypernatremia and hyperglycemia; furthermore, they appear to have no significant effect on superinfection and gastroduodenal bleeding.ConclusionsCorticosteroids had no significant effect on the 28-day and long-term mortality; however, they decreased the ICU and hospital mortality. The findings suggest that the clinical corticosteroids may be an effective therapy for patients with sepsis during the short time.Systematic review registrationhttps://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/INPLASY-Protocol-1074-4.pdf.
| S-EPMC8415513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSepsis is associated with a dysregulated host response to infection and impaired endogenous corticosteroid metabolism. As such, therapeutic use of exogenous corticosteroids is a promising adjunctive intervention. Despite a large number of trials examining this research question, uncertainty persists regarding the effect of corticosteroids on survival in sepsis. Several large randomised controlled trials have been published recently prompting a re-evaluation of the available literature.Methods and analysisA rigorous and reproducible search and screening process from a Cochrane review on the same topic was comprehensive to October 2014. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane trial registry and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible randomised controlled trials investigating the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis from September 2014. Outcomes have been chosen by a semi-independent guideline panel, created in the context of a parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation on the topic. This panel includes clinicians, content experts, methodologists and patient representatives, who will help identify patient-important outcomes that are critical for deciding whether to use or not use corticosteroids in sepsis. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify eligible studies; a third reviewer will resolve any disagreements. We will use RevMan to pool effect estimates from included studies for each outcome using a random-effect model. We will present the results as relative risk with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference or standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% CI. We will assess the certainty of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We will conduct a priori subgroup analyses, which have been chosen by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation panel.Ethics and disseminationThe aim of this systematic review is to summarise the updated evidence on the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.Trial registration numberCRD42017058537.
| S-EPMC5726130 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6494587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Presepsin is a novel biomarker to diagnose sepsis but its prognostic value has not been comprehensively reviewed. We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the mortality prediction value of presepsin in sepsis.We searched comprehensive electronic databases from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library through September 2017 using the key words of ('presepsin' or 'sCD14-ST' or 'soluble CD14 subtype') and ('sepsis' or 'septic shock') and ('prognosis' or 'prognostic value' or 'prognostic biomarker' or 'mortality'). We extracted the presepsin levels in survivors and non-survivors from each individual study and evaluated the standardized mean difference (SMD) using a web-based meta-analysis with the R statistical analysis program.A total of 10 studies and 1617 patients were included. Presepsin levels in the first sampling (within 24 hours) were significantly lower among survivors as compared with non-survivors: the pooled SMD between survivors and non-survivors was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.62-1.22) in the random effects model (I2 = 79%, P< 0.01). In subgroups, divided by the sepsis severity or study site, pooled SMD was consistently noting higher presepsin levels in non-survivals (P< 0.05).This meta-analysis demonstrates some mortality prediction value in presepsin in patients with sepsis. Further studies are needed to define the optimal cut-off point to predict mortality in sepsis.
| S-EPMC5783380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are often considered an empirical therapy in the management of patients with cough. However, ICS responsiveness is difficult to interpret in daily clinical practice, as the improvements may include placebo effects or self-remission. We aimed to evaluate ICS and placebo treatment effects in adult patients with cough. METHODS:Electronic databases were searched for studies published until June 2018, without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials reporting the effects of ICSs compared with placebo in adult patients with cough were included. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the treatment effects. Therapeutic gain was calculated by subtracting the percentage change from baseline in the cough score in the ICS treatment group from that in the placebo treatment group. RESULTS:A total of 9 studies were identified and 8 studies measuring cough severity outcomes were included for meta-analyses. Therapeutic gain from ICSs ranged from -5.0% to +94.6% across the studies included; however, it did not exceed +22%, except for an outlier reporting very high therapeutic gains (+45.6% to +94.6%, depending on outcomes). Overall ICS treatment effects in cough severity outcomes were small-to-moderate (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.54, -0.23), which were comparable between subacute and chronic coughs. However, pooled placebo treatment effects were very large in subacute cough (SMD, -2.58; 95% CI, -3.03, -2.1), and modest but significant in chronic cough (SMD, -0.46; 95% CI, -0.72, -0.21). CONCLUSIONS:Overall therapeutic gain from ICSs is small-to-moderate. However, placebo treatment effects of ICS are large in subacute cough, and modest but still significant in chronic cough. These findings indicate the need for careful interpretation of ICS responsiveness in the management of cough patients in the clinic, and also for rigorous patient selection to identify ICS-responders.
| S-EPMC6761077 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.Data sourcesWe searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, up to January 10, 2023.Study selectionWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing corticosteroids with placebo or standard care with sepsis.Data extractionThe critical outcomes of interest included mortality, shock reversal, length of stay in the ICU, and adverse events.Data analysisWe performed both a pairwise and dose-response meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of different corticosteroid doses on outcomes. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess certainty in pooled estimates.Data synthesisWe included 45 RCTs involving 9563 patients. Corticosteroids probably reduce short-term mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99; moderate certainty) and increase shock reversal at 7 days (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11-1.38; high certainty). Corticosteroids may have no important effect on duration of ICU stay (mean difference, -0.6 fewer days; 95% CI, 1.48 fewer to 0.27 more; low certainty); however, probably increase the risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; moderate certainty) and hypernatremia (RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.32-2.03; moderate certainty) and may increase the risk of neuromuscular weakness (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.45; low certainty). The dose-response analysis showed a reduction in mortality with corticosteroids with optimal dosing of approximately 260 mg/d of hydrocortisone (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.98) or equivalent.ConclusionsWe found that corticosteroids may reduce mortality and increase shock reversal but they may also increase the risk of hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and neuromuscular weakness. The dose-response analysis indicates optimal dosing is around 260 mg/d of hydrocortisone or equivalent.
| S-EPMC10798738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Procalcitonin (PCT) has been widely investigated for its prognostic value in septic patients. However, studies have produced conflicting results. The purpose of the present meta-analysis is to explore the diagnostic accuracy of a single PCT concentration and PCT non-clearance in predicting all-cause sepsis mortality. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge and the Cochrane Library. Articles written in English were included. A 2 × 2 contingency table was constructed based on all-cause mortality and PCT level or PCT non-clearance in septic patients. Two authors independently evaluated study eligibility and extracted data. The diagnostic value of PCT in predicting prognosis was determined using a bivariate meta-analysis model. We used the Q-test and I2 index to test heterogeneity. Twenty-three studies with 3,994 patients were included. An elevated PCT level was associated with a higher risk of death. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 2.60 (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.05-3.30) using a random-effects model (I(2) = 63.5%). The overall area under the summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73-0.80), with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.67-0.82) and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.52-0.74), respectively. There was significant evidence of heterogeneity for the PCT testing time (P = 0.020). Initial PCT values were of limited prognostic value in patients with sepsis. PCT non-clearance was a prognostic factor of death in patients with sepsis. The pooled RR was 3.05 (95% CI, 2.35-3.95) using a fixed-effects model (I(2) = 37.9%). The overall area under the SROC curve was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.75-0.83), with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58-0.82) and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.55-0.90), respectively. Elevated PCT concentrations and PCT non-clearance are strongly associated with all-cause mortality in septic patients. Further studies are needed to define the optimal cut-off point and the optimal definition of PCT non-clearance for accurate risk assessment.
| S-EPMC4468164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe anticoagulant treatment and clinical efficacy of heparin in sepsis remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the clinical efficacy of unfractionated heparin (UFH) in adult septic patients.MethodA systematic review of Medline, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, WEIPU database, CNKI database, WANFANG database was performed from inception to January 2021. We included Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the main outcome was 28 d mortality. Data analysis was performed with Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 software. The meta-analysis included 2617 patients from 15 RCTs.ResultsComparing to control group, UFH could reduce 28 d mortality (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.94) especially for patient with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) > 15, (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.96). In UFH group, the platelet (PLT) (MD: 9.18; 95% CI: 0.68 to 17.68) was higher, the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) was shorter (MD: -8.01; 95% CI: - 13.84 to - 2.18) and the prothrombin time (PT) results (P > 0.05) failed to reach statistical significance. UFH decreased multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) incidence (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.84), length of stay (LOS) in ICU (MD: -4.94; 95% CI: - 6.89 to - 2.99) and ventilation time (MD: -3.01; 95% CI: - 4.0 to - 2.02). And UFH had no adverse impact on bleeding (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.23).ConclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that UFH may reduce 28 d mortality and improve the clinical efficacy in sepsis patients without bleeding adverse effect.
| S-EPMC8777179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A recent report from the PROGRESS registry highlighted that low dose corticosteroids are widely used in patients with sepsis around the world. In this report, corticosteroids may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. However, these findings should be viewed with caution given that this study has several inherent flaws because of its retrospective nature and the lack of controlled use of corticosteroids. In this commentary, these findings are contrasted with those of a recent Cochrane systematic review.
| S-EPMC2945107 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Although corticosteroids are widely used for adults with sepsis, both the overall benefit and potential risks remain unclear. Objective:To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis. Data Sources and Study Selection:MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until March 20, 2018, and updated on August 10, 2018. The terms corticosteroids, sepsis, septic shock, hydrocortisone, controlled trials, and randomized controlled trial were searched alone or in combination. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included that compared administration of corticosteroids with placebo or standard supportive care in adults with sepsis. Data Extraction and Synthesis:Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% CIs. Two independent reviewers completed citation screening, data abstraction, and risk assessment. Main Outcomes and Measures:Twenty-eight-day mortality. Results:This meta-analysis included 37 RCTs (N = 9564 patients). Eleven trials were rated as low risk of bias. Corticosteroid use was associated with reduced 28-day mortality (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; I2 = 27%) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.94; I2 = 0%) and in-hospital mortality (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.99; I2 = 38%). Corticosteroids were significantly associated with increased shock reversal at day 7 (MD, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.80-3.11) and vasopressor-free days (MD, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.80-3.11) and with ICU length of stay (MD, -1.16; 95% CI, -2.12 to -0.20), the sequential organ failure assessment score at day 7 (MD, -1.38; 95% CI, -1.87 to -0.89), and time to resolution of shock (MD, -1.35; 95% CI, -1.78 to -0.91). However, corticosteroid use was associated with increased risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30) and hypernatremia (RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.24-1.99). Conclusions and Relevance:The findings suggest that administration of corticosteroids is associated with reduced 28-day mortality compared with placebo use or standard supportive care. More research is needed to associate personalized medicine with the corticosteroid treatment to select suitable patients who are more likely to show a benefit.
| S-EPMC6439648 | biostudies-literature