...
首页> 外文期刊>Critical care medicine >Reporting of Organ Support Outcomes in Septic Shock Randomized Controlled Trials: A Methodologic Review-The Sepsis Organ Support Study
【24h】

Reporting of Organ Support Outcomes in Septic Shock Randomized Controlled Trials: A Methodologic Review-The Sepsis Organ Support Study

机译:脓毒症休克随机对照试验中器官支持结果的报告:一种方法综述 - 败血器器官支持研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objectives: Many recent randomized controlled trials in the field of septic shock failed to demonstrate a benefit on mortality. Randomized controlled trials increasingly report organ support duration and organ support-free days as primary or secondary outcomes. We conducted a methodologic systematic review to assess how organ support outcomes were defined and reported in septic shock randomized controlled trials. Data Sources: MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. Study Selection: We included randomized controlled trials published between January 2004 and March 2018 that involved septic shock adults and assessed organ support duration and/or organ support-free days for hemodynamic support, respiratory support, or renal replacement therapy. Data Extraction: For each randomized controlled trial, we extracted the definitions of organ support duration and organ support-free days. We particularly evaluated how nonsurvivors were accounted for. Study authors were contacted to provide any missing information regarding these definitions. Data Synthesis: We included 28 randomized controlled trials. Organ support duration and organ support-free days outcomes were reported in 17 and 15 randomized controlled trials, respectively, for hemodynamic support, 15 and 15 for respiratory support, and five and nine for renal replacement therapy. Nonsurvivors were included in the organ support duration calculation in 13 of 14 randomized controlled trials (93%) for hemodynamic support and nine of 10 (90%) for respiratory support. The organ support-free days definition for hemodynamic support, respiratory support, and renal replacement therapy was reported in six of 15 randomized controlled trials (40%), eight of 15 randomized controlled trials (53%), and six of nine randomized controlled trials (67%) reporting an organ support-free days outcome, respectively. Of these, one half assigned "0" to nonsurvivors, and the other half attributed one point per day alive free of organ support up to a predefined time point. Conclusions: This study highlights the heterogeneity and infrequency of organ support duration/organ support-free days outcome reporting in septic shock trials. When reported, the definitions of these outcome measures and methods of calculation are also infrequently reported, in particular how nonsurvivors were accounted for, which may have an important impact on interpretation.
机译:目的:遗产休克领域的最近随机对照试验未能证明对死亡率的益处。随机对照试验日益报告机构支持持续时间和器官可靠的日子作为主要或二次结果。我们进行了一种方法系统审查,以评估器官支持结果如何在脓毒症休克随机对照试验中定义和报告。数据来源:通过PubMed,Embase,Cochrane中央寄存器和科学网络的Medline。学习选择:我们包括2018年1月至2018年1月至2018年3月之间发布的随机对照试验,涉及化脓性休克成年人,并评估器官支持持续时间和/或器官无支撑天用于血流动力学支持,呼吸支持或肾脏替代疗法。数据提取:对于每个随机对照试验,我们提取了器官支持持续时间和器官的定义。我们特别评估了非保险人的核算方式。研究作者被联系到提供有关这些定义的任何缺失的信息。数据合成:我们包括28个随机对照试验。器官支持持续时间和器官无需日期成果分别在17和15个随机对照试验中报告了血液动力学支持,15和15例,用于呼吸支撑,五个和肾脏替代治疗。 Nonsurvivors包含在14个随机对照试验(93%)中的器官支持持续时间计算中,用于血液动力学支持,九个(90%)的呼吸助推。在15名随机对照试验(40%)中,六种随机对照试验(53%)中的六个,六种随机对照试验(53%)中有八个,患有血液动力学支持,呼吸支持和肾置换疗法的无器官支持天定义。 (67%)分别报告机关无支撑日结果。其中,一半分配给非诊断者,另一半归因于每天的一个点,没有器官支持到预定的时间点。结论:本研究突出了器官支持持续时间/器官无支持天的异质性和缺点,其在脓毒症休克试验中的结果报告报告。据报道,这些结果措施和计算方法的定义也很少报道,特别是如何对非法维拉沃人进行核算,这可能对解释产生重要影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号