膈肌外起搏与传统康复疗法相结合对慢性阻塞性肺病患者的影响:系统综述与荟萃分析。

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Linhong Jiang, Pingping Sun, Peijun Li, Weibing Wu, Zhenwei Wang, Xiaodan Liu
{"title":"膈肌外起搏与传统康复疗法相结合对慢性阻塞性肺病患者的影响:系统综述与荟萃分析。","authors":"Linhong Jiang, Pingping Sun, Peijun Li, Weibing Wu, Zhenwei Wang, Xiaodan Liu","doi":"10.1177/17534666231218086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported the benefits of external diaphragm pacing combined with conventional rehabilitation therapies (EDP-CRTs) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, evidence-based regarding its effects remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of EDP-CRTs <i>versus</i> CRTs on patients with COPD.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Data sources and methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, China Biology Medicine Disc, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan-Fang Database, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database from inception to 10 September 2023. RCTs investigating the effects of EDP-CRTs <i>versus</i> CRTs on COPD patients were included. The primary outcome was pulmonary function, including forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), the percentage of predicted values of FEV1 (FEV1%pred), and FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC)%. Secondary outcomes included arterial blood gas analysis [the partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO<sub>2</sub>) and the partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO<sub>2</sub>)]; dyspnea [modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (mMRC)]; exercise capacity [6-min walking distance (6MWD)]; and quality of life [COPD assessment test (CAT)]. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0). The certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 13 studies/981 participants were included. The pooled results revealed significant benefits of EDP-CRTs <i>versus</i> CRTs on the FEV1 [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58-1.56], FEV1%pred [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 6.67, 95% CI = 5.69-7.64], the FEV1/FVC% (SMD = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.48-2.00), PaO<sub>2</sub> (SMD = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.74-1.84), PaCO<sub>2</sub> (SMD = -1.88, 95% CI = -2.71 to -1.04), mMRC (WMD = -0.55, 95% CI = -0.65 to -0.45), 6MWD (SMD = 1.63, 95% CI = 0.85-2.42), and CAT (WMD = -1.75, 95% CI = -3.16 to -0.35), respectively. Planned subgroup analysis suggested that EDP-CRTs had a better effect on FEV1, FEV1/FVC%, 6MWD, and CAT in the duration of 2-4 weeks.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EDP-CRTs have better effects on pulmonary function, PaCO<sub>2</sub>, dyspnea, exercise capacity, and quality of life in COPD patients than CRTs, and the duration to achieve the most effective treatment is 2-4 weeks.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42022355964).</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of external diaphragm pacing combined with conventional rehabilitation therapies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Linhong Jiang, Pingping Sun, Peijun Li, Weibing Wu, Zhenwei Wang, Xiaodan Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17534666231218086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported the benefits of external diaphragm pacing combined with conventional rehabilitation therapies (EDP-CRTs) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, evidence-based regarding its effects remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of EDP-CRTs <i>versus</i> CRTs on patients with COPD.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Data sources and methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, China Biology Medicine Disc, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan-Fang Database, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database from inception to 10 September 2023. RCTs investigating the effects of EDP-CRTs <i>versus</i> CRTs on COPD patients were included. The primary outcome was pulmonary function, including forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), the percentage of predicted values of FEV1 (FEV1%pred), and FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC)%. Secondary outcomes included arterial blood gas analysis [the partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO<sub>2</sub>) and the partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO<sub>2</sub>)]; dyspnea [modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (mMRC)]; exercise capacity [6-min walking distance (6MWD)]; and quality of life [COPD assessment test (CAT)]. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0). The certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 13 studies/981 participants were included. The pooled results revealed significant benefits of EDP-CRTs <i>versus</i> CRTs on the FEV1 [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58-1.56], FEV1%pred [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 6.67, 95% CI = 5.69-7.64], the FEV1/FVC% (SMD = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.48-2.00), PaO<sub>2</sub> (SMD = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.74-1.84), PaCO<sub>2</sub> (SMD = -1.88, 95% CI = -2.71 to -1.04), mMRC (WMD = -0.55, 95% CI = -0.65 to -0.45), 6MWD (SMD = 1.63, 95% CI = 0.85-2.42), and CAT (WMD = -1.75, 95% CI = -3.16 to -0.35), respectively. Planned subgroup analysis suggested that EDP-CRTs had a better effect on FEV1, FEV1/FVC%, 6MWD, and CAT in the duration of 2-4 weeks.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EDP-CRTs have better effects on pulmonary function, PaCO<sub>2</sub>, dyspnea, exercise capacity, and quality of life in COPD patients than CRTs, and the duration to achieve the most effective treatment is 2-4 weeks.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42022355964).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17534666231218086\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17534666231218086","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:许多随机对照试验(RCT)都报道了膈肌外起搏结合传统康复疗法(EDP-CRTs)对慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)患者肺功能和运动能力的益处。然而,有关其效果的证据仍不明确:本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估 EDP-CRT 与 CRT 对慢性阻塞性肺病患者的影响:设计:系统综述和荟萃分析:我们进行了系统综述和荟萃分析,检索了从开始到2023年9月10日的PubMed、Embase、Cochrane对照试验中央注册、Scopus、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国国家知识基础设施、万方数据库和中国科学期刊论文数据库。研究 EDP-CRT 与 CRT 对慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者影响的 RCT 均被纳入。主要研究结果为肺功能,包括 1 秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)、FEV1 预测值百分比(FEV1%pred)和 FEV1/用力肺活量(FVC)%。次要结果包括动脉血气分析[动脉血氧分压(PaO2)和动脉血二氧化碳分压(PaCO2)]、呼吸困难[改良医学研究委员会呼吸困难量表(mMRC)]、运动能力[6分钟步行距离(6MWD)]和生活质量[慢性阻塞性肺病评估测试(CAT)]。荟萃分析采用 RevMan 5.3 软件。纳入研究的质量采用修订版科克伦随机试验偏倚风险工具(RoB 2.0)进行评估。证据的确定性采用建议分级评估、发展和评价系统进行评估:共纳入 13 项研究/981 名参与者。汇总结果显示,EDP-CRT 与 CRT 相比,在 FEV1 [标准化平均差 (SMD) = 1.07,95% 置信区间 (CI) = 0.58-1.56]、FEV1%pred[加权平均差 (WMD) = 6.67,95% CI = 5.69-7.64]、FEV1/FVC%(SMD = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.48-2.00), PaO2 (SMD = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.74-1.84), PaCO2 (SMD = -1.88, 95% CI = -2.71 to -1.04), mMRC (WMD = -0.55, 95% CI = -0.65 to -0.45), 6MWD (SMD = 1.63, 95% CI = 0.85-2.42), 和 CAT (WMD = -1.75, 95% CI = -3.16 to -0.35)。计划中的亚组分析表明,EDP-CRT在2-4周的时间内对FEV1、FEV1/FVC%、6MWD和CAT有更好的效果:结论:与 CRT 相比,EDP-CRT 对 COPD 患者的肺功能、PaCO2、呼吸困难、运动能力和生活质量有更好的效果,达到最有效治疗的时间为 2-4 周:本系统综述和荟萃分析方案已在 PROSPERO 进行了前瞻性注册(编号:CRD42022355964)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of external diaphragm pacing combined with conventional rehabilitation therapies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported the benefits of external diaphragm pacing combined with conventional rehabilitation therapies (EDP-CRTs) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, evidence-based regarding its effects remains unclear.

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of EDP-CRTs versus CRTs on patients with COPD.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources and methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, China Biology Medicine Disc, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan-Fang Database, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database from inception to 10 September 2023. RCTs investigating the effects of EDP-CRTs versus CRTs on COPD patients were included. The primary outcome was pulmonary function, including forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), the percentage of predicted values of FEV1 (FEV1%pred), and FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC)%. Secondary outcomes included arterial blood gas analysis [the partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2) and the partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2)]; dyspnea [modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (mMRC)]; exercise capacity [6-min walking distance (6MWD)]; and quality of life [COPD assessment test (CAT)]. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0). The certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

Results: In total, 13 studies/981 participants were included. The pooled results revealed significant benefits of EDP-CRTs versus CRTs on the FEV1 [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58-1.56], FEV1%pred [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 6.67, 95% CI = 5.69-7.64], the FEV1/FVC% (SMD = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.48-2.00), PaO2 (SMD = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.74-1.84), PaCO2 (SMD = -1.88, 95% CI = -2.71 to -1.04), mMRC (WMD = -0.55, 95% CI = -0.65 to -0.45), 6MWD (SMD = 1.63, 95% CI = 0.85-2.42), and CAT (WMD = -1.75, 95% CI = -3.16 to -0.35), respectively. Planned subgroup analysis suggested that EDP-CRTs had a better effect on FEV1, FEV1/FVC%, 6MWD, and CAT in the duration of 2-4 weeks.

Conclusion: EDP-CRTs have better effects on pulmonary function, PaCO2, dyspnea, exercise capacity, and quality of life in COPD patients than CRTs, and the duration to achieve the most effective treatment is 2-4 weeks.

Trial registration: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42022355964).

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
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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