Influence of hydrocortisone infusion method on the clinical outcome of patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yuting Li, Youquan Wang, Jianxing Guo, Dong Zhang
{"title":"Influence of hydrocortisone infusion method on the clinical outcome of patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Yuting Li,&nbsp;Youquan Wang,&nbsp;Jianxing Guo,&nbsp;Dong Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.jointm.2024.05.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The effect of the modality of hydrocortisone administration on clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the impact of intermittent bolus and continuous infusion of hydrocortisone on these outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched the PubMed, Embase databases, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies published from inception to January 1, 2023. We included studies involving adult patients with septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality and clearly compared the clinically relevant secondary outcomes (ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, vasopressor-free days, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and ICU-acquired weakness [ICUAW]) of intermittent bolus and continuous infusion of hydrocortisone. Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42023392160.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Seven studies, including 554 patients, were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the short-term mortality between intermittent bolus and continuous infusion groups (OR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.73; <em>P</em>=0.31; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=9.06; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=34%). Secondary outcomes showed no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay (MD=−0.15, 95% CI: −2.31 to 2.02; <em>P</em>=0.89; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=0.95; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=0%), hospital length of stay (MD=0.63, 95% CI: −4.24 to 5.50; <em>P</em>=0.80; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=0.61; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=0%), vasopressor-free days (MD=−1.18, 95% CI: −2.43 to 0.06; <em>P</em>=0.06; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=2.48; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=60%), hyperglycemia (OR=1.27, 95% CI: 0.80 to 2.02; <em>P</em>=0.31; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=5.23; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=43%), hypernatremia (OR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.96; <em>P</em>=0.85; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=0.37; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=0%), or ICUAW (OR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.36 to 1.94; <em>P</em>=0.67; <em>Chi<sup>2</sup></em>=0.90; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup>=0%) between the two groups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in short-term mortality between intermittent bolus or continuous hydrocortisone infusion in patients with septic shock. Additionally, the hydrocortisone infusion method was not associated with ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, vasopressor-free days, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, or ICUAW.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73799,"journal":{"name":"Journal of intensive medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"Pages 100-107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11763613/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of intensive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667100X24000719","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The effect of the modality of hydrocortisone administration on clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the impact of intermittent bolus and continuous infusion of hydrocortisone on these outcomes.

Methods

We searched the PubMed, Embase databases, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies published from inception to January 1, 2023. We included studies involving adult patients with septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality and clearly compared the clinically relevant secondary outcomes (ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, vasopressor-free days, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and ICU-acquired weakness [ICUAW]) of intermittent bolus and continuous infusion of hydrocortisone. Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42023392160.

Results

Seven studies, including 554 patients, were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the short-term mortality between intermittent bolus and continuous infusion groups (OR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.73; P=0.31; Chi2=9.06; I2=34%). Secondary outcomes showed no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay (MD=−0.15, 95% CI: −2.31 to 2.02; P=0.89; Chi2=0.95; I2=0%), hospital length of stay (MD=0.63, 95% CI: −4.24 to 5.50; P=0.80; Chi2=0.61; I2=0%), vasopressor-free days (MD=−1.18, 95% CI: −2.43 to 0.06; P=0.06; Chi2=2.48; I2=60%), hyperglycemia (OR=1.27, 95% CI: 0.80 to 2.02; P=0.31; Chi2=5.23; I2=43%), hypernatremia (OR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.96; P=0.85; Chi2=0.37; I2=0%), or ICUAW (OR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.36 to 1.94; P=0.67; Chi2=0.90; I2=0%) between the two groups.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in short-term mortality between intermittent bolus or continuous hydrocortisone infusion in patients with septic shock. Additionally, the hydrocortisone infusion method was not associated with ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, vasopressor-free days, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, or ICUAW.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of intensive medicine
Journal of intensive medicine Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
58 days
期刊最新文献
Outside Front Cover Metabolomic profiling and prognostication in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome Outcomes and risk factors of transported patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An ECMO center experience Microcirculatory depth of focus measurement shows reduction of tissue edema by albumin resuscitation in burn patients Current advances in neurocritical care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1