直接喉镜下气管插管和视频喉镜下气管插管有压迫和无压迫的比较:一项人体模型模拟研究。

IF 0.8 Q4 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Mustafa Kürşat Ayrancı, Kadir Küçükceran, Zerrin Defne Dündar
{"title":"直接喉镜下气管插管和视频喉镜下气管插管有压迫和无压迫的比较:一项人体模型模拟研究。","authors":"Mustafa Kürşat Ayrancı,&nbsp;Kadir Küçükceran,&nbsp;Zerrin Defne Dündar","doi":"10.6705/j.jacme.202109_11(3).0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Optimal management for trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) is a clinical conundrum. In conjunction with the transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma (FFP), additional administration of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) was proposed to bring about further coagulative benefit. However, investigations evaluating the efficacy as well as corresponding side effects were scarce and inconsistent. The aim of this study was to systematically review current literature and to perform a meta-analysis comparing FFP+PCC with FFP alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Web search followed by manual interrogation was performed to identify relevant literatures fulfilling the following criteria, subjects as TIC patients taking no baseline anticoagulants, without underlying coagulative disorders, and reported clinical consequences. Those comparing FFP alone with PCC alone were excluded. Comprehensive Meta-analysis software was utilized, and statistical results were delineated with odd ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI). I<sup>2</sup> was calculated to determine heterogeneity. The primary endpoint was set as all-cause mortality, while the secondary endpoint consisted of international normalized ratio (INR) correction, transfusion of blood product, and thrombosis rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixty-four articles were included for preliminary evaluation, 3 of which were qualified for meta-analysis. A total of 840 subjects were pooled for assessment. Minimal heterogeneity was present in the comparisons (I<sup>2</sup> < 25%). In the PCC + FFP cohort, reduced mortality rate was observed (OR: 0.631; 95% CI: 0.450-0.884, <i>p</i> = 0.007) after pooling. Meanwhile, INR correction time was shorter under PCC + FFP (MD: -608.300 mins, <i>p</i> < 0.001), whilst the rate showed no difference (<i>p</i> = 0.230). The PCC + FFP group is less likely to mandate transfusion of packed red blood cells (<i>p</i> < 0.001) and plasma (<i>p</i> < 0.001), but not platelet (<i>p</i> = 0.615). The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was comparable in the two groups (<i>p</i> = 0.460).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with FFP only, PCC + FFP demonstrated better survival rate, favorable clinical recovery and no elevation of thromboembolism events after TIC.</p>","PeriodicalId":14846,"journal":{"name":"Journal of acute medicine","volume":"11 3","pages":"90-98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440434/pdf/jacme-11-3-02.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Endotracheal Intubations Performed With Direct Laryngoscopy and Video Laryngoscopy Scenarios With and Without Compression: A Manikin-Simulated Study.\",\"authors\":\"Mustafa Kürşat Ayrancı,&nbsp;Kadir Küçükceran,&nbsp;Zerrin Defne Dündar\",\"doi\":\"10.6705/j.jacme.202109_11(3).0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Optimal management for trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) is a clinical conundrum. In conjunction with the transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma (FFP), additional administration of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) was proposed to bring about further coagulative benefit. However, investigations evaluating the efficacy as well as corresponding side effects were scarce and inconsistent. The aim of this study was to systematically review current literature and to perform a meta-analysis comparing FFP+PCC with FFP alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Web search followed by manual interrogation was performed to identify relevant literatures fulfilling the following criteria, subjects as TIC patients taking no baseline anticoagulants, without underlying coagulative disorders, and reported clinical consequences. Those comparing FFP alone with PCC alone were excluded. Comprehensive Meta-analysis software was utilized, and statistical results were delineated with odd ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI). I<sup>2</sup> was calculated to determine heterogeneity. The primary endpoint was set as all-cause mortality, while the secondary endpoint consisted of international normalized ratio (INR) correction, transfusion of blood product, and thrombosis rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixty-four articles were included for preliminary evaluation, 3 of which were qualified for meta-analysis. A total of 840 subjects were pooled for assessment. Minimal heterogeneity was present in the comparisons (I<sup>2</sup> < 25%). In the PCC + FFP cohort, reduced mortality rate was observed (OR: 0.631; 95% CI: 0.450-0.884, <i>p</i> = 0.007) after pooling. Meanwhile, INR correction time was shorter under PCC + FFP (MD: -608.300 mins, <i>p</i> < 0.001), whilst the rate showed no difference (<i>p</i> = 0.230). The PCC + FFP group is less likely to mandate transfusion of packed red blood cells (<i>p</i> < 0.001) and plasma (<i>p</i> < 0.001), but not platelet (<i>p</i> = 0.615). The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was comparable in the two groups (<i>p</i> = 0.460).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with FFP only, PCC + FFP demonstrated better survival rate, favorable clinical recovery and no elevation of thromboembolism events after TIC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14846,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of acute medicine\",\"volume\":\"11 3\",\"pages\":\"90-98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440434/pdf/jacme-11-3-02.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of acute medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6705/j.jacme.202109_11(3).0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of acute medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6705/j.jacme.202109_11(3).0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:创伤性凝血功能障碍(TIC)的最佳治疗是一个临床难题。在输注新鲜冷冻血浆(FFP)的同时,建议额外给予凝血酶原复合物浓缩物(PCC),以进一步提高凝血效果。然而,评价其疗效和副作用的研究很少,且不一致。本研究的目的是系统地回顾现有文献,并进行荟萃分析,比较FFP+PCC与单纯FFP。方法:通过网络检索和人工问询,找出符合以下标准的相关文献,受试者为TIC患者,无基线抗凝药物,无潜在的凝血功能障碍,并报告了临床后果。排除单纯FFP与单纯PCC的比较。采用综合meta分析软件,用奇比(OR)、均差(MD)和95%置信区间(CI)对统计结果进行描述。计算I2来确定异质性。主要终点设置为全因死亡率,次要终点包括国际标准化比率(INR)校正、血液制品输血和血栓形成率。结果:纳入164篇文献进行初步评价,其中3篇符合meta分析。共有840名受试者被纳入评估。比较中存在最小的异质性(I2 < 25%)。在PCC + FFP队列中,观察到死亡率降低(OR: 0.631;95% CI: 0.450-0.884, p = 0.007)。PCC + FFP组的INR校正时间较短(MD: -608.300 min, p < 0.001),而校正率差异无统计学意义(p = 0.230)。PCC + FFP组不太可能强制输填充红细胞(p < 0.001)和血浆(p < 0.001),但不要求输血小板(p = 0.615)。两组深静脉血栓发生率相当(p = 0.460)。结论:与单纯FFP相比,PCC + FFP具有更好的生存率,良好的临床恢复,且TIC后血栓栓塞事件未升高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Endotracheal Intubations Performed With Direct Laryngoscopy and Video Laryngoscopy Scenarios With and Without Compression: A Manikin-Simulated Study.

Background: Optimal management for trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) is a clinical conundrum. In conjunction with the transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma (FFP), additional administration of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) was proposed to bring about further coagulative benefit. However, investigations evaluating the efficacy as well as corresponding side effects were scarce and inconsistent. The aim of this study was to systematically review current literature and to perform a meta-analysis comparing FFP+PCC with FFP alone.

Methods: Web search followed by manual interrogation was performed to identify relevant literatures fulfilling the following criteria, subjects as TIC patients taking no baseline anticoagulants, without underlying coagulative disorders, and reported clinical consequences. Those comparing FFP alone with PCC alone were excluded. Comprehensive Meta-analysis software was utilized, and statistical results were delineated with odd ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI). I2 was calculated to determine heterogeneity. The primary endpoint was set as all-cause mortality, while the secondary endpoint consisted of international normalized ratio (INR) correction, transfusion of blood product, and thrombosis rate.

Results: One hundred and sixty-four articles were included for preliminary evaluation, 3 of which were qualified for meta-analysis. A total of 840 subjects were pooled for assessment. Minimal heterogeneity was present in the comparisons (I2 < 25%). In the PCC + FFP cohort, reduced mortality rate was observed (OR: 0.631; 95% CI: 0.450-0.884, p = 0.007) after pooling. Meanwhile, INR correction time was shorter under PCC + FFP (MD: -608.300 mins, p < 0.001), whilst the rate showed no difference (p = 0.230). The PCC + FFP group is less likely to mandate transfusion of packed red blood cells (p < 0.001) and plasma (p < 0.001), but not platelet (p = 0.615). The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was comparable in the two groups (p = 0.460).

Conclusions: Compared with FFP only, PCC + FFP demonstrated better survival rate, favorable clinical recovery and no elevation of thromboembolism events after TIC.

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
Journal of acute medicine
Journal of acute medicine EMERGENCY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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