Prophylactic antibiotics in adults with acute brain injury who are invasively ventilated in the Intensive Care Unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kathryn Hadley-Brown, Laura Hailstone, Roisin Devane, Tak Chan, Anthony Devaux, Joshua S Davis, Naomi Hammond, Qiang Li MBioStat, Edward Litton, John Myburgh, Alexis Poole, Joseph Alvin Santos, Ian Seppelt, Steven Y C Tong, Andrew Udy, Balasubramanian Venkatesh, Paul J Young, Anthony P Delaney
{"title":"Prophylactic antibiotics in adults with acute brain injury who are invasively ventilated in the Intensive Care Unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Kathryn Hadley-Brown, Laura Hailstone, Roisin Devane, Tak Chan, Anthony Devaux, Joshua S Davis, Naomi Hammond, Qiang Li MBioStat, Edward Litton, John Myburgh, Alexis Poole, Joseph Alvin Santos, Ian Seppelt, Steven Y C Tong, Andrew Udy, Balasubramanian Venkatesh, Paul J Young, Anthony P Delaney","doi":"10.1016/j.chest.2024.10.031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lower respiratory tract infections are common in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) after an acute brain injury and may have deleterious consequences.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>In adults with acute brain injury receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in an ICU, is the administration of prophylactic parenteral antibiotics, compared to placebo or usual care, associated with reduced mortality?</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in electronic databases, as well as unpublished trials. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, secondary outcomes included the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. We used a random effects model to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 1728 reports of studies screened, with 7 RCTs recruiting 835 participants included. No trials were adjudicated as having a high risk of bias. The pooled estimated risk ratio (RR) for mortality associated with the use of prophylactic antibiotics was 0.91 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.17, p=0.39, low certainty). The pooled estimated RR for ventilator associated pneumonia was 0.56 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.89, low certainty). The pooled estimated duration of mechanical ventilation for those allocated to prophylactic antibiotics compared to control (mean difference (MD) -2.0 days, 95% CI -6.1 to 2.1, very low certainty) and duration of ICU admission (MD -2.2 days, 95% CI -5.4 to 1.1 days, very low certainty) were similar.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Current evidence from randomised clinical trials does not provide definitive evidence regarding the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on mortality in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU.</p>","PeriodicalId":9782,"journal":{"name":"Chest","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chest","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.10.031","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Lower respiratory tract infections are common in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) after an acute brain injury and may have deleterious consequences.
Research question: In adults with acute brain injury receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in an ICU, is the administration of prophylactic parenteral antibiotics, compared to placebo or usual care, associated with reduced mortality?
Study design and methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in electronic databases, as well as unpublished trials. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, secondary outcomes included the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. We used a random effects model to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE methods.
Results: There were 1728 reports of studies screened, with 7 RCTs recruiting 835 participants included. No trials were adjudicated as having a high risk of bias. The pooled estimated risk ratio (RR) for mortality associated with the use of prophylactic antibiotics was 0.91 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.17, p=0.39, low certainty). The pooled estimated RR for ventilator associated pneumonia was 0.56 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.89, low certainty). The pooled estimated duration of mechanical ventilation for those allocated to prophylactic antibiotics compared to control (mean difference (MD) -2.0 days, 95% CI -6.1 to 2.1, very low certainty) and duration of ICU admission (MD -2.2 days, 95% CI -5.4 to 1.1 days, very low certainty) were similar.
Interpretation: Current evidence from randomised clinical trials does not provide definitive evidence regarding the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on mortality in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU.
期刊介绍:
At CHEST, our mission is to revolutionize patient care through the collaboration of multidisciplinary clinicians in the fields of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. We achieve this by publishing cutting-edge clinical research that addresses current challenges and brings forth future advancements. To enhance understanding in a rapidly evolving field, CHEST also features review articles, commentaries, and facilitates discussions on emerging controversies. We place great emphasis on scientific rigor, employing a rigorous peer review process, and ensuring all accepted content is published online within two weeks.