危重患者和高危术前患者对比剂相关急性肾损伤的预防:系统评价和网络荟萃分析方案

Woraphon Choatwongwachira, Sidaporn Louisirirotchanakul, Kaweesak Chittawatararat, C. Ruengorn, K. Trongtrakul, Srisuluk Kacha
{"title":"危重患者和高危术前患者对比剂相关急性肾损伤的预防:系统评价和网络荟萃分析方案","authors":"Woraphon Choatwongwachira, Sidaporn Louisirirotchanakul, Kaweesak Chittawatararat, C. Ruengorn, K. Trongtrakul, Srisuluk Kacha","doi":"10.54205/ccc.v31.259642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: There is limited information of the contrast-associated acute kidney (CA-AKI) prevention in critically-ill patients. Applying the evidence for CA-AKI prevention from non-critically-ill to critically-ill patients could potentially invalidate the data. Therefore, we find it necessary to assess the benefits of preventive strategy by summarizing existing evidence from clinical trials in this systematic review and network meta‐analysis (NMA).\n\nMethods and analysis: We will search electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from their inception dates with no language restrictions. Both randomized trials and non-randomized studies using validated measurement tools that investigated the benefits of pharmacological interventions among patients who undergo contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT). The primary outcome is the incidence of CA-AKI in medical and surgical critically-ill patients who undergo CECT after receiving medication. The risk of bias assessment and analysis of the strength of the evidence will be performed independently by a pair of reviewers. A two-step approach of traditional pairwise and NMA will be performed. Based on a random-effects model, standardized weighted mean differences and ORs with corresponding 95% CIs will be pooled as effect estimates for the continuous and categorical endpoints, respectively. Statistical and methodological heterogeneities will be assessed. Preplanned subgroup analyses and univariate meta-regression will be conducted to quantify the potential sources of heterogeneity. Evidence-based synthesis will be based on the magnitudes of effect size, evidence certainty and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.\n\n \nEthics: Ethical approval is not required because this study is based on existing published data.\n\n PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022328974","PeriodicalId":76963,"journal":{"name":"AACN clinical issues in critical care nursing","volume":"84 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevention of contrast-associated acute kidney injury in critically-ill and high-risk preoperative patient: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Woraphon Choatwongwachira, Sidaporn Louisirirotchanakul, Kaweesak Chittawatararat, C. Ruengorn, K. Trongtrakul, Srisuluk Kacha\",\"doi\":\"10.54205/ccc.v31.259642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: There is limited information of the contrast-associated acute kidney (CA-AKI) prevention in critically-ill patients. Applying the evidence for CA-AKI prevention from non-critically-ill to critically-ill patients could potentially invalidate the data. Therefore, we find it necessary to assess the benefits of preventive strategy by summarizing existing evidence from clinical trials in this systematic review and network meta‐analysis (NMA).\\n\\nMethods and analysis: We will search electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from their inception dates with no language restrictions. Both randomized trials and non-randomized studies using validated measurement tools that investigated the benefits of pharmacological interventions among patients who undergo contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT). The primary outcome is the incidence of CA-AKI in medical and surgical critically-ill patients who undergo CECT after receiving medication. The risk of bias assessment and analysis of the strength of the evidence will be performed independently by a pair of reviewers. A two-step approach of traditional pairwise and NMA will be performed. Based on a random-effects model, standardized weighted mean differences and ORs with corresponding 95% CIs will be pooled as effect estimates for the continuous and categorical endpoints, respectively. Statistical and methodological heterogeneities will be assessed. Preplanned subgroup analyses and univariate meta-regression will be conducted to quantify the potential sources of heterogeneity. Evidence-based synthesis will be based on the magnitudes of effect size, evidence certainty and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.\\n\\n \\nEthics: Ethical approval is not required because this study is based on existing published data.\\n\\n PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022328974\",\"PeriodicalId\":76963,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AACN clinical issues in critical care nursing\",\"volume\":\"84 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AACN clinical issues in critical care nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54205/ccc.v31.259642\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AACN clinical issues in critical care nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54205/ccc.v31.259642","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在危重患者中预防对比剂相关急性肾(CA-AKI)的信息有限。将CA-AKI预防证据从非危重患者应用到危重患者可能会使数据无效。因此,我们发现有必要通过总结本系统评价和网络meta分析(NMA)中临床试验的现有证据来评估预防策略的益处。方法和分析:我们将搜索电子数据库,包括PubMed, Embase和Scopus,从它们的成立日期开始,没有语言限制。随机试验和非随机研究使用有效的测量工具来调查药物干预对接受对比增强计算机断层扫描(CECT)的患者的益处。主要结局是内科和外科危重患者在接受药物治疗后进行CECT的CA-AKI发生率。偏倚风险评估和证据强度分析将由两位审稿人独立进行。本文将采用传统的两步走方法和NMA方法。基于随机效应模型,标准化加权平均差异和相应95% ci的or将分别作为连续终点和分类终点的效应估计。将评估统计和方法上的异质性。将进行预先计划的亚组分析和单变量元回归,以量化潜在的异质性来源。循证综合将根据效应大小的大小、证据确定性和表面下的累积排序曲线值。伦理:由于本研究基于现有已发表的数据,因此不需要伦理批准。普洛斯彼罗注册号:CRD42022328974
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prevention of contrast-associated acute kidney injury in critically-ill and high-risk preoperative patient: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Introduction: There is limited information of the contrast-associated acute kidney (CA-AKI) prevention in critically-ill patients. Applying the evidence for CA-AKI prevention from non-critically-ill to critically-ill patients could potentially invalidate the data. Therefore, we find it necessary to assess the benefits of preventive strategy by summarizing existing evidence from clinical trials in this systematic review and network meta‐analysis (NMA). Methods and analysis: We will search electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from their inception dates with no language restrictions. Both randomized trials and non-randomized studies using validated measurement tools that investigated the benefits of pharmacological interventions among patients who undergo contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT). The primary outcome is the incidence of CA-AKI in medical and surgical critically-ill patients who undergo CECT after receiving medication. The risk of bias assessment and analysis of the strength of the evidence will be performed independently by a pair of reviewers. A two-step approach of traditional pairwise and NMA will be performed. Based on a random-effects model, standardized weighted mean differences and ORs with corresponding 95% CIs will be pooled as effect estimates for the continuous and categorical endpoints, respectively. Statistical and methodological heterogeneities will be assessed. Preplanned subgroup analyses and univariate meta-regression will be conducted to quantify the potential sources of heterogeneity. Evidence-based synthesis will be based on the magnitudes of effect size, evidence certainty and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.   Ethics: Ethical approval is not required because this study is based on existing published data.  PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022328974
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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