Cargando…

Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: Catecholamines are commonly used in septic shock but face limitations of their hypo-responsiveness and adverse events due to high dose. Terlipressin is a synthetic vasopressin analog with greater selectivity for the V1-receptor. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Yibing, Huang, Huibin, Xi, Xiuming, Du, Bin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6419496/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30923620
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-019-0369-1
_version_ 1783403959648518144
author Zhu, Yibing
Huang, Huibin
Xi, Xiuming
Du, Bin
author_facet Zhu, Yibing
Huang, Huibin
Xi, Xiuming
Du, Bin
author_sort Zhu, Yibing
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Catecholamines are commonly used in septic shock but face limitations of their hypo-responsiveness and adverse events due to high dose. Terlipressin is a synthetic vasopressin analog with greater selectivity for the V1-receptor. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of terlipressin in septic shock. METHODS: We searched for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception up to July 15, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they reported data on any of the predefined outcomes in patients with septic shock and managed with terlipressin or any catecholamines. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were explored. RESULTS: Ten studies with 928 patients were included. Despite the shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, use of terlipressin did not reduce the risk of mortality (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.05; I(2) = 0%; P = 0.28) when compared with control. This finding was confirmed by further subgroup and sensitivity analyses. In addition, lactate clearance, length of stay in ICU or hospital, total adverse events, digital ischemia, and arrhythmia were also similar between groups, while terlipressin was associated with shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and less norepinephrine requirements. CONCLUSIONS: Current results suggest terlipressin did not show added survival benefit in septic shock therapy when compared with catecholamines. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-019-0369-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6419496
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64194962019-03-28 Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study Zhu, Yibing Huang, Huibin Xi, Xiuming Du, Bin J Intensive Care Research BACKGROUND: Catecholamines are commonly used in septic shock but face limitations of their hypo-responsiveness and adverse events due to high dose. Terlipressin is a synthetic vasopressin analog with greater selectivity for the V1-receptor. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of terlipressin in septic shock. METHODS: We searched for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception up to July 15, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they reported data on any of the predefined outcomes in patients with septic shock and managed with terlipressin or any catecholamines. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were explored. RESULTS: Ten studies with 928 patients were included. Despite the shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, use of terlipressin did not reduce the risk of mortality (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.05; I(2) = 0%; P = 0.28) when compared with control. This finding was confirmed by further subgroup and sensitivity analyses. In addition, lactate clearance, length of stay in ICU or hospital, total adverse events, digital ischemia, and arrhythmia were also similar between groups, while terlipressin was associated with shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and less norepinephrine requirements. CONCLUSIONS: Current results suggest terlipressin did not show added survival benefit in septic shock therapy when compared with catecholamines. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-019-0369-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6419496/ /pubmed/30923620 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-019-0369-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Zhu, Yibing
Huang, Huibin
Xi, Xiuming
Du, Bin
Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
title Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
title_full Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
title_fullStr Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
title_full_unstemmed Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
title_short Terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
title_sort terlipressin for septic shock patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6419496/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30923620
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-019-0369-1
work_keys_str_mv AT zhuyibing terlipressinforsepticshockpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT huanghuibin terlipressinforsepticshockpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT xixiuming terlipressinforsepticshockpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT dubin terlipressinforsepticshockpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudy