Impact of Vasodilator Administration on Survival in Patients with Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 6.8 2区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Orestes Y Mavrothalassitis, Isabel E Allen, Daniel V Lazzareschi, Peggy Tahir, Matthieu Legrand
{"title":"Impact of Vasodilator Administration on Survival in Patients with Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Orestes Y Mavrothalassitis,&nbsp;Isabel E Allen,&nbsp;Daniel V Lazzareschi,&nbsp;Peggy Tahir,&nbsp;Matthieu Legrand","doi":"10.1513/AnnalsATS.202303-205OC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Rationale:</b> Sepsis and septic shock are associated with microcirculatory dysfunction, which is believed to contribute to sepsis-induced organ failure. Vasodilators have been proposed to improve tissue perfusion in sepsis, but the overall survival impact of this strategy is unclear. <b>Objectives:</b> To evaluate the impact of systemic vasodilator administration in patients with sepsis and septic shock on mortality. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a meta-analysis using a random effects model. Published and unpublished randomized trials in adult patients with sepsis and septic shock were included when comparing the use of systemic vasodilators against no vasodilators. The primary outcome was 28-30-day mortality, and secondary outcomes were organ function and resource use measures. <b>Results:</b> We included eight randomized trials (1,076 patients). In patients randomized to vasodilator arms compared with those randomized to treatment without vasodilators, the 28-30-day mortality risk ratio was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.01). In a chronological cumulative meta-analysis, the association between vasodilators and survival improved over time. In a prespecified subgroup analysis in 104 patients in two randomized trials, prostacyclin analogues were associated with a decreased rate of 28-30-day mortality among patients with sepsis and septic shock (risk ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.85). <b>Conclusions:</b> In patients with sepsis and septic shock, administration of vasodilators is not associated with decreased 28-30-day mortality, but the confidence interval suggests potential benefit, and the meta-analysis might lack power. Prostacyclin appears the most promising. The results of this meta-analysis should encourage randomized trials evaluating the impact of vasodilators on mortality in sepsis.</p>","PeriodicalId":8018,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the American Thoracic Society","volume":"20 9","pages":"1345-1352"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the American Thoracic Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202303-205OC","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale: Sepsis and septic shock are associated with microcirculatory dysfunction, which is believed to contribute to sepsis-induced organ failure. Vasodilators have been proposed to improve tissue perfusion in sepsis, but the overall survival impact of this strategy is unclear. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of systemic vasodilator administration in patients with sepsis and septic shock on mortality. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis using a random effects model. Published and unpublished randomized trials in adult patients with sepsis and septic shock were included when comparing the use of systemic vasodilators against no vasodilators. The primary outcome was 28-30-day mortality, and secondary outcomes were organ function and resource use measures. Results: We included eight randomized trials (1,076 patients). In patients randomized to vasodilator arms compared with those randomized to treatment without vasodilators, the 28-30-day mortality risk ratio was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.01). In a chronological cumulative meta-analysis, the association between vasodilators and survival improved over time. In a prespecified subgroup analysis in 104 patients in two randomized trials, prostacyclin analogues were associated with a decreased rate of 28-30-day mortality among patients with sepsis and septic shock (risk ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.85). Conclusions: In patients with sepsis and septic shock, administration of vasodilators is not associated with decreased 28-30-day mortality, but the confidence interval suggests potential benefit, and the meta-analysis might lack power. Prostacyclin appears the most promising. The results of this meta-analysis should encourage randomized trials evaluating the impact of vasodilators on mortality in sepsis.

血管扩张剂对脓毒症患者生存的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
理由:脓毒症和脓毒性休克与微循环功能障碍有关,微循环功能障碍被认为是脓毒症诱导的器官衰竭的原因之一。血管扩张剂已被提出用于改善脓毒症的组织灌注,但该策略的总体生存影响尚不清楚。目的:评价全身性血管扩张剂对脓毒症及感染性休克患者死亡率的影响。方法:采用随机效应模型进行meta分析。在比较使用全身性血管扩张剂和不使用血管扩张剂时,纳入了已发表和未发表的成年脓毒症和感染性休克患者的随机试验。主要终点是28-30天死亡率,次要终点是器官功能和资源利用措施。结果:我们纳入了8项随机试验(1076例患者)。随机分配到血管扩张剂组的患者与随机分配到不使用血管扩张剂组的患者相比,28-30天死亡率风险比为0.74(95%可信区间为0.54-1.01)。在一项按时间顺序累积的荟萃分析中,血管扩张剂与生存率之间的关系随着时间的推移而改善。在两项随机试验的104例患者的预先指定亚组分析中,前列环素类似物与脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者28-30天死亡率降低相关(风险比,0.46;95%置信区间,0.25-0.85)。结论:在脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者中,使用血管扩张剂与降低28-30天死亡率无关,但可信区间提示有潜在益处,meta分析可能缺乏效力。前列环素似乎是最有希望的。这项荟萃分析的结果应该鼓励评估血管扩张剂对败血症死亡率影响的随机试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of the American Thoracic Society
Annals of the American Thoracic Society Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Annals of the American Thoracic Society (AnnalsATS) is the official international online journal of the American Thoracic Society. Formerly known as PATS, it provides comprehensive and authoritative coverage of a wide range of topics in adult and pediatric pulmonary medicine, respiratory sleep medicine, and adult medical critical care. As a leading journal in its field, AnnalsATS offers up-to-date and reliable information that is directly applicable to clinical practice. It serves as a valuable resource for clinical specialists, supporting their formative and continuing education. Additionally, the journal is committed to promoting public health by publishing research and articles that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in these fields.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信