Dataset Information

Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Control-arm mortality varies between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) RCTs.

Methods

We systematically reviewed ARDS RCTs that commenced recruitment after publication of the American-European Consensus (AECC) definition (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials; January 1994 to October 2020). We assessed concordance of RCT inclusion criteria to ARDS consensus definitions and whether exclusion criteria are strongly or poorly justified. We estimated the proportion of between-trial difference in control-arm 28-day mortality explained by the inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics using meta-regression.

Results

A literature search identified 43 709 records. One hundred and fifty ARDS RCTs were included; 146/150 (97.3%) RCTs defined ARDS inclusion criteria using AECC/Berlin definitions. Deviations from consensus definitions, primarily aimed at improving ARDS diagnostic certainty, frequently related to duration of hypoxaemia (117/146; 80.1%). Exclusion criteria could be grouped by rationale for selection into strongly or poorly justified criteria. Common poorly justified exclusions included pregnancy related, age, and comorbidities (infectious/immunosuppression, hepatic, renal, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Control-arm 28-day mortality varied between ARDS RCTs (mean: 29.8% [95% confidence interval: 27.0-32.7%; I²=88.8%; τ²=0.02; P<0.01]), and differed significantly between RCTs with different Pao₂:FiO₂ ratio inclusion thresholds (26.6-39.9 kPa vs <26.6 kPa; P<0.01). In a meta-regression model, inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics accounted for 30.6% of between-trial difference (P<0.01).

Conclusions

In most ARDS RCTs, consensus definitions are modified to use as inclusion criteria. Between-RCT mortality differences are mostly explained by the Pao₂:FiO₂ ratio threshold within the consensus definitions. An exclusion criteria framework can be applied when designing and reporting exclusion criteria in future ARDS RCTs.

SUBMITTER: Saha R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9768208 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Saha Rohit R Assouline Benjamin B Mason Georgina G Douiri Abdel A Summers Charlotte C Shankar-Hari Manu M

British journal of anaesthesia 20210401 1

<h4>Background</h4>Control-arm mortality varies between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) RCTs.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed ARDS RCTs that commenced recruitment after publication of the American-European Consensus (AECC) definition (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials; January 1994 to October 2020). We assessed concordance of RCT inclusion criteria to ARDS consensus definitions and whether exclusion criteria are strongly or poorly justified. ...[more]

PMID: 33812666

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) recently recommended changes to the criteria of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), patients with high-flow oxygen were included, however, the effect of these changes remains unclear. Our objectives were to evaluate the performance of these new criteria and to compare the outcomes of patients meeting the new ARDS criteria with those meeting the Berlin ARDS criteria.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort. The patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) were diagnosed with ARDS. Patients were classified as meeting Berlin criteria ARDS (n = 4279), high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) criteria ARDS (n = 559), or new criteria ARDS (n = 4838).ResultsIn comparison with HFNO criteria ARDS and new criteria ARDS, patients with Berlin criteria ARDS demonstrated lower blood oxygen levels assessed by PaO2/FiO2, SpO2/FiO2, and ROX (SpO2/FiO2/respiratory rate) (p < 0.001); and higher severity of illness assessed by the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluations (APACHE II), Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) (p < 0.001), (p < 0.001), and longer ICU and hospital stays (p < 0.001). In comparison with the HFNO criteria, patients meeting Berlin criteria ARDS had higher hospital mortality (10.6% vs. 16.9%; p = 0.0082), 28-day mortality (10.6% vs. 16.5%; p = 0.0079), and 90-day mortality (10.7% vs. 17.1%; p = 0.0083). ARDS patients with HFNO did not have severe ARDS; Berlin criteria ARDS patients with severe ARDS had the highest mortality rate (approximately 33%). PaO2/FiO2, SpO2/FiO2, and ROX negatively correlated with the SOFA and APACHE II scores. The SOFA and APACHE II scores had high specificity and sensitivity for prognosis in patients with new criteria ARDS.ConclusionThe new criteria of ARDS reduced the severity of illness, length of stay in the ICU, length of hospital stays, and overall mortality. SOFA and APACHE II scores remain important in assessing the prognosis of patients with new criteria ARDS.Trial registrationRegistration number: ChiCTR2200067084.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the incidence, severity, and outcomes of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome following trauma using Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference criteria.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingLevel 1 pediatric trauma center.PatientsTrauma patients less than or equal to 17 years admitted to the ICU from 2009 to 2017.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsWe queried electronic health records to identify patients meeting pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome oxygenation criteria for greater than or equal to 6 hours and determined whether patients met complete pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome criteria via chart review. We estimated associations between pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome and outcome using generalized linear Poisson regression adjusted for age, injury mechanism, Injury Severity Score, and serious brain and chest injuries. Of 2,470 critically injured children, 103 (4.2%) met pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome criteria. Mortality was 34.0% among pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome patients versus 1.7% among patients without pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (adjusted relative risk, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.0-6.9). Mortality was 50.0% for severe pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome at onset, 33.3% for moderate, and 30.5% for mild. Cause of death was neurologic in 60.0% and multiple organ failure in 34.3% of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome nonsurvivors versus neurologic in 85.4% of nonsurvivors without pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (p = 0.001). Among survivors, 77.1% of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome patients had functional disability at discharge versus 30.7% of patients without pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome patients (p < 0.001), and only 17.5% of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome patients discharged home without ongoing care versus 86.4% of patients without pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (adjusted relative risk, 1.5; 1.1-2.1).ConclusionsIncidence and mortality associated with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome following traumatic injury are substantially higher than previously recognized, and pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome development is associated with high risk of poor outcome even after adjustment for underlying injury type and severity.

Project description:BackgroundDiagnostic guidelines for pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS) were developed at the 2015 Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference (PALICC). Although this was an improvement in creating pediatric-specific diagnostic criteria, there remains potential for variability in identification of PARDS.Research questionWhat is the inter-rater reliability of the 2015 PALICC criteria for diagnosing moderate-severe PARDS? What clinical criteria and patient factors are associated with diagnostic disagreements?Study design/methodsPatients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure admitted from 2016-2021 who received invasive mechanical ventilation were retrospectively reviewed by two PICU physicians. Reviewers evaluated whether the patient met the 2015 PALICC definition of moderate-severe PARDS and rated their diagnostic confidence. Inter-rater reliability was measured using Gwet's Agreement Coefficient (AC1).Results37 of 191 encounters had a diagnostic disagreement. Inter-rater reliability was "substantial" (AC1=0.74, 95% CI [0.65 - 0.83]). Disagreements were due to different interpretations of chest radiographs (56.8%), ambiguity in origin of pulmonary edema (37.8%), or lack of clarity if patient's current condition was significantly different from baseline (27.0%). Disagreement was more likely in patients who were chronically ventilated (OR 4.66, 95% CI [2.16-10.08], p<0.001), had a primary cardiac admission diagnosis (OR 3.36, 95% CI [1.18 - 9.53], p=0.02), or underwent cardiothoracic surgery during the admission (OR 4.90, 95% CI [1.60 - 15.00], p=0.005). Reviewers were at least moderately confident in their decision 73% of the time, however were less likely to be confident if the patient had cardiac disease or chronic respiratory failure.InterpretationThe inter-rater reliability of the 2015 PALICC criteria for diagnosing moderate-severe PARDS in this cohort was substantial, with diagnostic disagreements commonly due to differences in chest radiograph interpretations. Patients with cardiac disease or chronic respiratory failure were more vulnerable to diagnostic disagreements. More guidance is needed on interpreting chest radiographs and diagnosing PARDS in these subgroups.

Dataset Information

Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets