氯胺酮对重症患者预后的影响:随机对照试验的荟萃分析和试验序列分析系统综述。

IF 1.7 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Acute and Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-28 DOI:10.4266/acc.2023.00829
Yerkin Abdildin, Karina Tapinova, Assel Nemerenova, Dmitriy Viderman
{"title":"氯胺酮对重症患者预后的影响:随机对照试验的荟萃分析和试验序列分析系统综述。","authors":"Yerkin Abdildin, Karina Tapinova, Assel Nemerenova, Dmitriy Viderman","doi":"10.4266/acc.2023.00829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of ketamine in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library; the search was performed initially in January but was repeated in December of 2023. We focused on ICU patients of any age. We included studies that compared ketamine with other traditional agents used in the ICU. We synthesized evidence using RevMan v5.4 and presented the results as forest plots. We also used trial sequential analysis (TSA) software v. 0.9.5.10 Beta and presented results as TSA plots. For synthesizing results, we used a random-effects model and reported differences in outcomes of two groups in terms of mean difference (MD), standardized MD, and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB tool for RCTs. Our outcomes were mortality, pain, opioid and midazolam requirements, delirium rates, and ICU length of stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve RCTs involving 805 ICU patients (ketamine group, n=398; control group, n=407) were included in the meta-analysis. The ketamine group was not superior to the control group in terms of mortality (in five studies with 318 patients), pain (two studies with 129 patients), mean and cumulative opioid consumption (six studies with 494 patients), midazolam consumption (six studies with 304 patients), and ICU length of stay (three studies with 270 patients). However, the model favored the ketamine group over the control group in delirium rate (four studies with 358 patients). This result is significant in terms of conventional boundaries (alpha=5%) but is not robust in sequential analysis. The applicability of the findings is limited by the small number of patients pooled for each outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our meta-analysis did not demonstrate differences between ketamine and control groups regarding any outcome except delirium rate, where the model favored the ketamine group over the control group. However, this result is not robust as sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis suggest that more RCTs should be conducted in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":44118,"journal":{"name":"Acute and Critical Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11002615/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of ketamine on outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Yerkin Abdildin, Karina Tapinova, Assel Nemerenova, Dmitriy Viderman\",\"doi\":\"10.4266/acc.2023.00829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of ketamine in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library; the search was performed initially in January but was repeated in December of 2023. We focused on ICU patients of any age. We included studies that compared ketamine with other traditional agents used in the ICU. We synthesized evidence using RevMan v5.4 and presented the results as forest plots. We also used trial sequential analysis (TSA) software v. 0.9.5.10 Beta and presented results as TSA plots. For synthesizing results, we used a random-effects model and reported differences in outcomes of two groups in terms of mean difference (MD), standardized MD, and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB tool for RCTs. Our outcomes were mortality, pain, opioid and midazolam requirements, delirium rates, and ICU length of stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve RCTs involving 805 ICU patients (ketamine group, n=398; control group, n=407) were included in the meta-analysis. The ketamine group was not superior to the control group in terms of mortality (in five studies with 318 patients), pain (two studies with 129 patients), mean and cumulative opioid consumption (six studies with 494 patients), midazolam consumption (six studies with 304 patients), and ICU length of stay (three studies with 270 patients). However, the model favored the ketamine group over the control group in delirium rate (four studies with 358 patients). This result is significant in terms of conventional boundaries (alpha=5%) but is not robust in sequential analysis. The applicability of the findings is limited by the small number of patients pooled for each outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our meta-analysis did not demonstrate differences between ketamine and control groups regarding any outcome except delirium rate, where the model favored the ketamine group over the control group. However, this result is not robust as sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis suggest that more RCTs should be conducted in the future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acute and Critical Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11002615/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acute and Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2023.00829\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acute and Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2023.00829","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:这是一项荟萃分析:本荟萃分析旨在评估氯胺酮对重症监护病房(ICU)重症患者的影响:我们在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Cochrane 图书馆中搜索了随机对照试验 (RCT);搜索最初在 2023 年 1 月进行,但在 12 月又重复了一次。我们的研究对象是任何年龄段的重症监护室患者。我们纳入了将氯胺酮与 ICU 使用的其他传统药物进行比较的研究。我们使用 RevMan v5.4 对证据进行了综合,并以森林图的形式展示了结果。我们还使用了试验序列分析(TSA)软件 v.0.9.5.10 Beta 版,并以 TSA 图的形式展示结果。在综合结果时,我们使用了随机效应模型,并以平均差(MD)、标准化 MD 和风险比(含 95% 置信区间)来报告两组结果的差异。我们使用针对 RCT 的 Cochrane RoB 工具评估了偏倚风险。我们的研究结果包括死亡率、疼痛、阿片类药物和咪达唑仑的需求量、谵妄率和重症监护室的住院时间:荟萃分析纳入了涉及 805 名 ICU 患者的 12 项 RCT(氯胺酮组,n=398;对照组,n=407)。氯胺酮组在死亡率(5 项研究,318 名患者)、疼痛(2 项研究,129 名患者)、阿片类药物平均和累计用量(6 项研究,494 名患者)、咪达唑仑用量(6 项研究,304 名患者)和重症监护室住院时间(3 项研究,270 名患者)方面均不优于对照组。然而,在谵妄率方面,氯胺酮组优于对照组(四项研究,共 358 名患者)。这一结果在常规边界(α=5%)上是显著的,但在序列分析中并不稳健。由于每项结果汇集的患者人数较少,因此研究结果的适用性受到了限制:我们的荟萃分析未显示氯胺酮组和对照组在任何结果上存在差异,但谵妄率除外,模型显示氯胺酮组优于对照组。然而,这一结果并不可靠,因为敏感性分析和试验顺序分析表明,今后应进行更多的研究性临床试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The impact of ketamine on outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of ketamine in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library; the search was performed initially in January but was repeated in December of 2023. We focused on ICU patients of any age. We included studies that compared ketamine with other traditional agents used in the ICU. We synthesized evidence using RevMan v5.4 and presented the results as forest plots. We also used trial sequential analysis (TSA) software v. 0.9.5.10 Beta and presented results as TSA plots. For synthesizing results, we used a random-effects model and reported differences in outcomes of two groups in terms of mean difference (MD), standardized MD, and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB tool for RCTs. Our outcomes were mortality, pain, opioid and midazolam requirements, delirium rates, and ICU length of stay.

Results: Twelve RCTs involving 805 ICU patients (ketamine group, n=398; control group, n=407) were included in the meta-analysis. The ketamine group was not superior to the control group in terms of mortality (in five studies with 318 patients), pain (two studies with 129 patients), mean and cumulative opioid consumption (six studies with 494 patients), midazolam consumption (six studies with 304 patients), and ICU length of stay (three studies with 270 patients). However, the model favored the ketamine group over the control group in delirium rate (four studies with 358 patients). This result is significant in terms of conventional boundaries (alpha=5%) but is not robust in sequential analysis. The applicability of the findings is limited by the small number of patients pooled for each outcome.

Conclusions: Our meta-analysis did not demonstrate differences between ketamine and control groups regarding any outcome except delirium rate, where the model favored the ketamine group over the control group. However, this result is not robust as sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis suggest that more RCTs should be conducted in the future.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acute and Critical Care
Acute and Critical Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
A clinical risk score for predicting acute kidney injury in sepsis patients receiving normal saline in Northern Thailand: a retrospective cohort study. A quasi-experimental study to assess the effect of Benson's relaxation on anxiety and depression among patients with heart failure in Jordan. A study to assess the psychosocial needs of patient family members in the intensive care unit in India. Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency: latest pathophysiology and management guidelines. Incidence of hypothermia in critically ill patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy in Siriraj Hospital, Thailand.
×
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