Cargando…
Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
OBJECTIVE: Conservative oxygen strategy is recommended in acute illness while its benefit in ICU patients remains controversial. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine such oxygen strategies’ effect and safety in ICU patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Em...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8295978/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34294147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-021-00563-7 |
_version_ | 1783725531193147392 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Xiao-Li Zhang, Bei-Lei Meng, Chang Huang, Hui-Bin Du, Bin |
author_facet | Chen, Xiao-Li Zhang, Bei-Lei Meng, Chang Huang, Hui-Bin Du, Bin |
author_sort | Chen, Xiao-Li |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Conservative oxygen strategy is recommended in acute illness while its benefit in ICU patients remains controversial. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine such oxygen strategies’ effect and safety in ICU patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception to Feb 15, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a conservative oxygen strategy to a conventional strategy in critically ill patients were included. Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary outcome was the longest follow-up mortality. Heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were also investigated to test the robustness of the primary outcome. RESULTS: We included seven trials with a total of 5265 patients. In general, the conventional group had significantly higher SpO(2) or PaO(2) than that in the conservative group. No statistically significant differences were found in the longest follow-up mortality (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.97–1.10; I(2)=18%; P=0.34) between the two oxygen strategies when pooling studies enrolling subjects with various degrees of hypoxemia. Further sensitivity analysis showed that ICU patients with mild-to-moderate hypoxemia (PaO(2)/FiO(2) >100 mmHg) had significantly lower mortality (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05–1.46; I(2)=0%; P=0.01) when receiving conservative oxygen therapy. These findings were also confirmed in other study periods. Additional, secondary outcomes of the duration of mechanical ventilation, the length of stay in the ICU and hospital, change in sequential organ failure assessment score, and adverse events were comparable between the two strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that conservative oxygen therapy strategy did not improve the prognosis of the overall ICU patients. The subgroup of ICU patients with mild to moderate hypoxemia might obtain prognosis benefit from such a strategy without affecting other critical clinical results. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-021-00563-7. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8295978 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82959782021-07-23 Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Chen, Xiao-Li Zhang, Bei-Lei Meng, Chang Huang, Hui-Bin Du, Bin J Intensive Care Research OBJECTIVE: Conservative oxygen strategy is recommended in acute illness while its benefit in ICU patients remains controversial. Therefore, we sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine such oxygen strategies’ effect and safety in ICU patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception to Feb 15, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a conservative oxygen strategy to a conventional strategy in critically ill patients were included. Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary outcome was the longest follow-up mortality. Heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were also investigated to test the robustness of the primary outcome. RESULTS: We included seven trials with a total of 5265 patients. In general, the conventional group had significantly higher SpO(2) or PaO(2) than that in the conservative group. No statistically significant differences were found in the longest follow-up mortality (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.97–1.10; I(2)=18%; P=0.34) between the two oxygen strategies when pooling studies enrolling subjects with various degrees of hypoxemia. Further sensitivity analysis showed that ICU patients with mild-to-moderate hypoxemia (PaO(2)/FiO(2) >100 mmHg) had significantly lower mortality (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05–1.46; I(2)=0%; P=0.01) when receiving conservative oxygen therapy. These findings were also confirmed in other study periods. Additional, secondary outcomes of the duration of mechanical ventilation, the length of stay in the ICU and hospital, change in sequential organ failure assessment score, and adverse events were comparable between the two strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that conservative oxygen therapy strategy did not improve the prognosis of the overall ICU patients. The subgroup of ICU patients with mild to moderate hypoxemia might obtain prognosis benefit from such a strategy without affecting other critical clinical results. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-021-00563-7. BioMed Central 2021-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8295978/ /pubmed/34294147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-021-00563-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Chen, Xiao-Li Zhang, Bei-Lei Meng, Chang Huang, Hui-Bin Du, Bin Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title | Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full | Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_short | Conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_sort | conservative oxygen therapy for critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8295978/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34294147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-021-00563-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenxiaoli conservativeoxygentherapyforcriticallyillpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT zhangbeilei conservativeoxygentherapyforcriticallyillpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT mengchang conservativeoxygentherapyforcriticallyillpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT huanghuibin conservativeoxygentherapyforcriticallyillpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT dubin conservativeoxygentherapyforcriticallyillpatientsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |