Cargando…
Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Control-arm mortality varies between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) RCTs. METHODS: We systematically reviewed ARDS RCTs that commenced recruitment after publication of the American–European Consensus (AECC) definition (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane central register of control...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33812666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2021.02.027 |
_version_ | 1784854116909973504 |
---|---|
author | Saha, Rohit Assouline, Benjamin Mason, Georgina Douiri, Abdel Summers, Charlotte Shankar-Hari, Manu |
author_facet | Saha, Rohit Assouline, Benjamin Mason, Georgina Douiri, Abdel Summers, Charlotte Shankar-Hari, Manu |
author_sort | Saha, Rohit |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Control-arm mortality varies between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) RCTs. METHODS: We systematically reviewed ARDS RCTs that commenced recruitment after publication of the American–European Consensus (AECC) definition (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials; January 1994 to October 2020). We assessed concordance of RCT inclusion criteria to ARDS consensus definitions and whether exclusion criteria are strongly or poorly justified. We estimated the proportion of between-trial difference in control-arm 28-day mortality explained by the inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics using meta-regression. RESULTS: A literature search identified 43 709 records. One hundred and fifty ARDS RCTs were included; 146/150 (97.3%) RCTs defined ARDS inclusion criteria using AECC/Berlin definitions. Deviations from consensus definitions, primarily aimed at improving ARDS diagnostic certainty, frequently related to duration of hypoxaemia (117/146; 80.1%). Exclusion criteria could be grouped by rationale for selection into strongly or poorly justified criteria. Common poorly justified exclusions included pregnancy related, age, and comorbidities (infectious/immunosuppression, hepatic, renal, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Control-arm 28-day mortality varied between ARDS RCTs (mean: 29.8% [95% confidence interval: 27.0–32.7%; I(2)=88.8%; τ(2)=0.02; P<0.01]), and differed significantly between RCTs with different Pao(2):FiO(2) ratio inclusion thresholds (26.6–39.9 kPa vs <26.6 kPa; P<0.01). In a meta-regression model, inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics accounted for 30.6% of between-trial difference (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In most ARDS RCTs, consensus definitions are modified to use as inclusion criteria. Between-RCT mortality differences are mostly explained by the Pao(2):FiO(2) ratio threshold within the consensus definitions. An exclusion criteria framework can be applied when designing and reporting exclusion criteria in future ARDS RCTs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9768208 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97682082022-12-21 Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis Saha, Rohit Assouline, Benjamin Mason, Georgina Douiri, Abdel Summers, Charlotte Shankar-Hari, Manu Br J Anaesth Critical Care BACKGROUND: Control-arm mortality varies between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) RCTs. METHODS: We systematically reviewed ARDS RCTs that commenced recruitment after publication of the American–European Consensus (AECC) definition (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials; January 1994 to October 2020). We assessed concordance of RCT inclusion criteria to ARDS consensus definitions and whether exclusion criteria are strongly or poorly justified. We estimated the proportion of between-trial difference in control-arm 28-day mortality explained by the inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics using meta-regression. RESULTS: A literature search identified 43 709 records. One hundred and fifty ARDS RCTs were included; 146/150 (97.3%) RCTs defined ARDS inclusion criteria using AECC/Berlin definitions. Deviations from consensus definitions, primarily aimed at improving ARDS diagnostic certainty, frequently related to duration of hypoxaemia (117/146; 80.1%). Exclusion criteria could be grouped by rationale for selection into strongly or poorly justified criteria. Common poorly justified exclusions included pregnancy related, age, and comorbidities (infectious/immunosuppression, hepatic, renal, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Control-arm 28-day mortality varied between ARDS RCTs (mean: 29.8% [95% confidence interval: 27.0–32.7%; I(2)=88.8%; τ(2)=0.02; P<0.01]), and differed significantly between RCTs with different Pao(2):FiO(2) ratio inclusion thresholds (26.6–39.9 kPa vs <26.6 kPa; P<0.01). In a meta-regression model, inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics accounted for 30.6% of between-trial difference (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In most ARDS RCTs, consensus definitions are modified to use as inclusion criteria. Between-RCT mortality differences are mostly explained by the Pao(2):FiO(2) ratio threshold within the consensus definitions. An exclusion criteria framework can be applied when designing and reporting exclusion criteria in future ARDS RCTs. British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2021-07 2021-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9768208/ /pubmed/33812666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2021.02.027 Text en © 2021 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Critical Care Saha, Rohit Assouline, Benjamin Mason, Georgina Douiri, Abdel Summers, Charlotte Shankar-Hari, Manu Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Critical Care |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33812666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2021.02.027 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT saharohit impactofdifferencesinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromerandomisedcontrolledtrialinclusionandexclusioncriteriasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT assoulinebenjamin impactofdifferencesinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromerandomisedcontrolledtrialinclusionandexclusioncriteriasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT masongeorgina impactofdifferencesinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromerandomisedcontrolledtrialinclusionandexclusioncriteriasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT douiriabdel impactofdifferencesinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromerandomisedcontrolledtrialinclusionandexclusioncriteriasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT summerscharlotte impactofdifferencesinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromerandomisedcontrolledtrialinclusionandexclusioncriteriasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shankarharimanu impactofdifferencesinacuterespiratorydistresssyndromerandomisedcontrolledtrialinclusionandexclusioncriteriasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |