Search

Abstract Background Systematic reviews and data synthesis of randomised clinical trials play a crucial role in clinical practice, research, and health policy. Trial sequential analysis can be used in systematic reviews to control type I and type II errors, but methodological errors including lack of protocols and transparency are cause for concern. We assessed the reporting of trial sequential analysis. Methods We searched Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2021 for systematic reviews and meta-analysis reports that include a trial sequential analysis. Only studies with at least two randomised clinical trials analysed in a forest plot and a trial sequential analysis were included. Two independent investigators assessed the studies. We evaluated protocolisation, reporting, and interpretation of the analyses, including their effect on any GRADE evaluation of imprecision. Results We included 270 systematic reviews and 274 meta-analysis reports and extracted data from 624 trial sequential analyses. Only 134/270 (50%) systematic reviews planned the trial sequential analysis in the protocol. For analyses on dichotomous outcomes, the proportion of events in the control group was missing in 181/439 (41%), relative risk reduction in 105/439 (24%), alpha in 30/439 (7%), beta in 128/439 (29%), and heterogeneity in 232/439 (53%). For analyses on continuous outcomes, the minimally relevant difference was missing in 125/185 (68%), variance (or standard deviation) in 144/185 (78%), alpha in 23/185 (12%), beta in 63/185 (34%), and heterogeneity in 105/185 (57%). Graphical illustration of the trial sequential analysis was present in 93% of the analyses, however, the Z-curve was wrongly displayed in 135/624 (22%) and 227/624 (36%) did not include futility boundaries. The overall transparency of all 624 analyses was very poor in 236 (38%) and poor in 173 (28%). Conclusions The majority of trial sequential analyses are not transparent when preparing or presenting the required parameters, partly due to missing or poorly conducted protocols. This hampers interpretation, reproducibility, and validity. Study registration PROSPERO CRD42021273811

Abstract Background Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) corrective surgery may involve significant blood loss and blood transfusion requirements. Antifibrinolytic agents such as tranexamic acid (TXA) have been used to reduce blood loss, but its optimal dose is uncertain. The objective of this study is to determine the estimated blood loss and rate of blood transfusion between two groups of AIS patients receiving TXA as a single bolus versus bolus followed by infusion in scoliosis surgery. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of a single bolus versus bolus followed by infusion of TXA in AIS surgery. AIS patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) from December 2018 to September 2019 at a tertiary university hospital were identified. Inclusion criteria were patients aged between 10 and 21 years who received either a single bolus of 30 mg/kg TXA (Group A) or a single bolus of 30 mg/kg followed by continuous infusion of 10 mg/kg/h of TXA (Group B). Patient demographics, operative data, estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and complications were recorded. Results A total of 129 AIS patients were included. All operative surgeries were performed by two senior consultants. The mean age was 14.8 ± 3.4 years old, and 89.1% were female. The Cobb angle, number of fusion levels, number of screws, length of skin incision, and duration of surgery were comparable between the two groups. There was no difference in the total estimated blood loss between the two groups: 723.3 ± 279.4 mL (range: 175.0–1607.0 mL) in Group A and 819.4 ± 302.6 mL (range: 330.0–1556.0 mL) in Group B (p = 0.065). There were no complications, and none received blood transfusion. Conclusion TXA when administered as a single bolus or bolus followed by infusion in AIS patients undergoing PSF surgery was associated with similar estimated total surgical blood loss and blood transfusion requirement.

Abstract Background Recent data from the randomized SUSTAIN CSX trial could not confirm clinical benefits from perioperative selenium treatment in high-risk cardiac surgery patients. Underlying reasons may involve inadequate biosynthesis of glutathione peroxidase (GPx3), which is a key mediator of selenium's antioxidant effects. This secondary analysis aimed to identify patients with an increase in GPx3 activity following selenium treatment. We hypothesize that these responders might benefit from perioperative selenium treatment. Methods Patients were selected based on the availability of selenium biomarker information. Four subgroups were defined according to the patient's baseline status, including those with normal kidney function, reduced kidney function, selenium deficiency, and submaximal GPx3 activity. Results Two hundred and forty-four patients were included in this analysis. Overall, higher serum concentrations of selenium, selenoprotein P (SELENOP) and GPx3 were correlated with less organ injury. GPx3 activity at baseline was predictive of 6-month survival (AUC 0.73; p = 0.03). While selenium treatment elevated serum selenium and SELENOP concentrations but not GPx3 activity in the full patient cohort, subgroup analyses revealed that GPx3 activity increased in patients with reduced kidney function, selenium deficiency and low to moderate GPx3 activity. Clinical outcomes did not vary between selenium treatment and placebo in any of these subgroups, though the study was not powered to conclusively detect differences in outcomes. Conclusions The identification of GPx3 responders encourages further refined investigations into the treatment effects of selenium in high-risk cardiac surgery patients. Graphical Abstract

Abstract Background The liberal use of remifentanil in spine surgery has been associated with an increased incidence of postoperative hyperalgesia. Nevertheless, controversies remain as the existing evidence is inconclusive to determine the relationship between remifentanil use and the development of opioid-induced hyperalgesia. We hypothesized that intraoperative infusion of higher dose remifentanil during scoliosis surgery is associated with postoperative hyperalgesia, manifesting clinically as greater postoperative morphine consumption and pain scores. Methods Ninety-seven patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who underwent posterior spinal fusion surgery at a single tertiary institution from March 2019 until June 2020 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Anesthesia was maintained using a target-controlled infusion of remifentanil combined with volatile anesthetic desflurane in 92 patients, while five patients received it as part of total intravenous anesthesia. Intravenous ketamine, paracetamol, and fentanyl were administered as multimodal analgesia. All patients received patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine postoperatively. Pain scores at rest and on movement, assessed using the numerical rating scale, and the cumulative PCA morphine consumption were collected at a six-hourly interval for up to 48 h. According to the median intraoperative remifentanil dose usage of 0.215 µg/kg/min, patients were divided into two groups: low dose and high dose group. Results There were no significant differences in the pain score and cumulative PCA morphine consumption between the low and high dose remifentanil group. The mean duration of remifentanil infusion was 134.9 ± 22.0 and 123.4 ± 23.7 min, respectively. Conclusion Intraoperative use of remifentanil as an adjuvant in AIS patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion surgery was not associated with postoperative hyperalgesia.

Abstract Background A recent landmark randomized controlled trial (RCT) in septic patients demonstrated an increased risk of death and persistent organ dysfunction with intravenous Vitamin C (IVVC) monotherapy, which represents a disparate result from previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMA). We performed an updated SRMA of IVVC monotherapy to summarize and explore heterogeneity across current trials and conduct trial sequential analysis (TSA) to guard against type-I or type-II statistical errors. Methods RCTs evaluating IVVC in adult critically ill patients were included. Four databases were searched from inception to 22 June 2022 without language restrictions. The primary outcome was overall mortality. Random effect meta-analysis was performed to estimate the pooled risk ratio. TSA for mortality was performed using the DerSimonian–Laird random effect model, alpha 5%, beta 10%, and relative risk reduction (RRR) of 30%, 25%, and 20%. Results We included 16 RCTs (n = 2130). IVVC monotherapy is associated with significant reduction in overall mortality [risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60–0.89; p = 0.002; I 2 = 42%]. This finding is supported by TSA using RRR of 30% and 25%, and sensitivity analysis using fixed-effect meta-analysis. However, the certainty of our mortality finding was rated low using GRADE due to the serious risk of bias and inconsistency. In a priori subgroup analyses, we found no differences between single vs multicenter, higher (≥ 10,000 mg/day) vs lower dose and sepsis vs non-sepsis trials. Post-hoc, we found no differences in subgroup analysis of earlier ( 4 days) vs shorter treatment duration, and low vs other risk of bias studies. IVVC may have the greatest benefit in trials that enrolled patients above (i.e., > 37.5%; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.79) vs below (i.e., ≤ 37.5%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.68–1.16) median control group mortality (test for subgroup differences: p = 0.06), and TSA supported this. Conclusions IVVC monotherapy may be associated with mortality benefits in critically ill patients, particularly in patients with a high risk of dying. Given the low certainty of evidence, this potentially life-saving therapy warrants further studies to identify the optimal timing, dosage, treatment duration, and patient population that will benefit most from IVVC monotherapy. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42022323880. Registered 7th May 2022.

Abstract Background The clinical significance of vitamin D administration in critically ill patients remains inconclusive. The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of vitamin D and its metabolites on major clinical outcomes in critically ill patients, including a subgroup analysis based on vitamin D status and route of vitamin D administration. Methods Major databases were searched through February 9, 2022. Randomized controlled trials of adult critically ill patients with an intervention group receiving vitamin D or its metabolites were included. Random-effect meta-analyses were performed to estimate the pooled risk ratio (dichotomized outcomes) or mean difference (continuous outcomes). Risk of bias assessment included the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Results Sixteen randomized clinical trials with 2449 patients were included. Vitamin D administration was associated with lower overall mortality (16 studies: risk ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.62–0.97, p = 0.03; I 2 = 30%), reduced intensive care unit length of stay (12 studies: mean difference − 3.13 days, 95% CI − 5.36 to − 0.89, n = 1250, p = 0.006; I 2 = 70%), and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (9 studies: mean difference − 5.07 days, 95% CI − 7.42 to − 2.73, n = 572, p

Abstract Background Parenteral lipid emulsions in critical care are traditionally based on soybean oil (SO) and rich in pro-inflammatory omega-6 fatty acids (FAs). Parenteral nutrition (PN) strategies with the aim of reducing omega-6 FAs may potentially decrease the morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. Methods A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL was conducted to identify all randomized controlled trials in critically ill patients published from inception to June 2021, which investigated clinical omega-6 sparing effects. Two independent reviewers extracted bias risk, treatment details, patient characteristics and clinical outcomes. Random effect meta-analysis was performed. Results 1054 studies were identified in our electronic search, 136 trials were assessed for eligibility and 26 trials with 1733 critically ill patients were included. The median methodologic score was 9 out of 14 points (95% confidence interval [CI] 7, 10). Omega-6 FA sparing PN in comparison with traditional lipid emulsions did not decrease overall mortality (20 studies; risk ratio [RR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.76, 1.10; p = 0.34) but hospital length of stay was substantially reduced (6 studies; weighted mean difference [WMD] − 6.88; 95% CI − 11.27, − 2.49; p = 0.002). Among the different lipid emulsions, fish oil (FO) containing PN reduced the length of intensive care (8 studies; WMD − 3.53; 95% CI − 6.16, − 0.90; p = 0.009) and rate of infectious complications (4 studies; RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.44, 0.95; p = 0.03). When FO was administered as a stand-alone medication outside PN, potential mortality benefits were observed compared to standard care. Conclusion Overall, these findings highlight distinctive omega-6 sparing effects attributed to PN. Among the different lipid emulsions, FO in combination with PN or as a stand-alone treatment may have the greatest clinical impact. Trial registration PROSPERO international prospective database of systematic reviews (CRD42021259238). Graphical abstract

Abstract Background The optimal protein dose in critical illness is unknown. We aim to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effect of higher versus lower protein delivery (with similar energy delivery between groups) on clinical and patient-centered outcomes in critically ill patients. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CINAHL from database inception through April 1, 2021.We included RCTs of (1) adult (age ≥ 18) critically ill patients that (2) compared higher vs lower protein with (3) similar energy intake between groups, and (4) reported clinical and/or patient-centered outcomes. We excluded studies on immunonutrition. Two authors screened and conducted quality assessment independently and in duplicate. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the pooled risk ratio (dichotomized outcomes) or mean difference (continuous outcomes). Results Nineteen RCTs were included (n = 1731). Sixteen studies used primarily the enteral route to deliver protein. Intervention was started within 72 h of ICU admission in sixteen studies. The intervention lasted between 3 and 28 days. In 11 studies that reported weight-based nutrition delivery, the pooled mean protein and energy received in higher and lower protein groups were 1.31 ± 0.48 vs 0.90 ± 0.30 g/kg and 19.9 ± 6.9 versus 20.1 ± 7.1 kcal/kg, respectively. Higher vs lower protein did not significantly affect overall mortality [risk ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75–1.10, p = 0.34] or other clinical or patient-centered outcomes. In 5 small studies, higher protein significantly attenuated muscle loss (MD −3.44% per week, 95% CI −4.99 to −1.90; p