Pulmonary artery perfusion versus no pulmonary perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with COPD:a randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION: Absence of pulmonary perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) may be associated with reduced postoperative oxygenation. Effects of active pulmonary artery perfusion were explored in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: 90 patients were randomised to receive pulmonary artery perfusion during CPB with either oxygenated blood (n=30) or histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) solution (n=29) compared with no pulmonary perfusion (n=31). The coprimary outcomes were the inverse oxygenation index compared at 21 hours after starting CPB and longitudinally in a mixed-effects model (MEM). Secondary outcomes were tracheal intubation time, serious adverse events, mortality, days alive outside the intensive care unit (ICU) and outside the hospital. RESULTS: 21 hours after starting CPB patients receiving pulmonary artery perfusion with normothermic oxygenated blood had a higher oxygenation index compared with no pulmonary perfusion (mean difference (MD) 0.94; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.83; p=0.04). The blood group had also a higher oxygenation index both longitudinally (MEM, p=0.009) and at 21 hours (MD 0.99; CI 0.29 to 1.69; p=0.007) compared with the HTK group. The latest result corresponds to a difference in the arterial partial pressure of oxygen of 23 mm Hg with a median fraction of inspired oxygen of 0.32. Yet the blood or HTK groups did not demonstrate a longitudinally higher oxygenation index compared with no pulmonary perfusion (MEM, p=0.57 and 0.17). Similarly, at 21 hours there was no difference in the oxygenation index between the HTK group and those no pulmonary perfusion (MD 0.06; 95% CI −0.73 to 0.86; p=0.87). There were no statistical significant differences between the groups for the secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: Pulmonary artery perfusion with normothermic oxygenated blood during cardiopulmonary bypass appears to improve postoperative oxygenation in patients with COPD undergoing cardiac surgery. Pulmonary artery perfusion with hypothermic HTK solution does not seem to improve postoperative oxygenation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01614951; Pre-results

Plexus anesthesia versus general anesthesia in patients for carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty:Protocol for a systematic review with meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analysis of randomized clinical trials

Introduction: Traditional carotid endarterectomy is considered to be the standard technique for prevention of a new stroke in patients with a symptomatic carotid stenosis. Use of plexus anesthesia or general anesthesia in traditional carotid endarterectomy is, to date, not unequivocally proven to be superior to one other. A systematic review is needed for evaluation of benefits and harms to determine which technique, plexus anesthesia or general anesthesia is more effective for traditional carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods and outcomes: The review will be conducted according to this protocol following the recommendations of the ‘Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews’ and reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Randomized Clinical Trials comparing plexus anesthesia versus general anesthesia in traditional carotid endarterectomy will be included. Primary outcomes will be postoperative death and/ or stroke (<30 days) and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be non-serious adverse events. We will primarily base our conclusions on meta-analyses of trials with overall low risk of bias. We will use Trial Sequential Analysis to assist the evaluation of imprecision in Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. However, if pooled point-estimates of all trials are similar to pooled point-estimates of trials with overall low risk of bias and there is lack of a statistical significant interaction between estimates from trials with overall high risk of bias and trials with overall low risk of bias we will consider the Trial Sequential Analysis adjusted confidence interval precision of the estimate achieved in all trials as the result of our meta-analyses. Ethics and dissemination: The proposed systematic review will collect and analyze secondary data from already performed studies therefore ethical approval is not required. The results of the systematic review will be disseminated by publication in a peer-review journal and submitted for presentation at relevant conferences

Statistical Multiplicity in Systematic Reviews of Anaesthesia Interventions: A Quantification and Comparison between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews with meta-analyses often contain many statistical tests. This multiplicity may increase the risk of type I error. Few attempts have been made to address the problem of statistical multiplicity in systematic reviews. Before the implications are properly considered, the size of the issue deserves clarification. Because of the emphasis on bias evaluation and because of the editorial processes involved, Cochrane reviews may contain more multiplicity than their non-Cochrane counterparts. This study measured the quantity of statistical multiplicity present in a population of systematic reviews and aimed to assess whether this quantity is different in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We selected all the systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group containing a meta-analysis and matched them with comparable non-Cochrane reviews. We counted the number of statistical tests done in each systematic review. The median number of tests overall was 10 (interquartile range (IQR) 6 to 18). The median was 12 in Cochrane and 8 in non-Cochrane reviews (difference in medians 4 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0-19.0). The proportion that used an assessment of risk of bias as a reason for doing extra analyses was 42% in Cochrane and 28% in non-Cochrane reviews (difference in proportions 14% (95% CI -8 to 36). The issue of multiplicity was addressed in 6% of all the reviews. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Statistical multiplicity in systematic reviews requires attention. We found more multiplicity in Cochrane reviews than in non-Cochrane reviews. Many of the reasons for the increase in multiplicity may well represent improved methodological approaches and greater transparency, but multiplicity may also cause an increased risk of spurious conclusions. Few systematic reviews, whether Cochrane or non-Cochrane, address the issue of multiplicity

Association between AIRE gene polymorphism and rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies.

Autoimmune regulator (AIRE) is a transcription factor that functions as a novel player in immunological investigations. In the thymus, it has a pivotal role in the negative selection of naive T-cells during central tolerance. Experimental studies have shown that single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) alters transcription of the AIRE gene. SNPs thereby provide a less efficient negative selection, propagate higher survival of autoimmune T-cells, and elevate susceptibility to autoimmune diseases. To date, only rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been analysed by epidemiological investigations in relation to SNPs in AIRE. In our meta-analysis, we sought to encompass case-control studies and confirm that the association between SNP occurrence and RA. After robust searches of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases, we found 19 articles that included five independent studies. Out of 11 polymorphisms, two (rs2075876, rs760426) were common in the five case-control studies. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis for rs2075876 (7145 cases and 8579 controls) and rs760426 (6696 cases and 8164 controls). Our results prove that rs2075876 and rs760426 are significantly associated with an increased risk of RA in allelic, dominant, recessive, codominant heterozygous, and codominant homozygous genetic models. These findings are primarily based on data from Asian populations

Glucocorticosteroids for sepsis:systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Glucocorticosteroids (steroids) are widely used for sepsis patients. However, the potential benefits and harms of both high and low dose steroids remain unclear. A systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) might shed light on this clinically important question. A systematic review was conducted according to a published protocol and The Cochrane Handbook methodology including meta-analyses, TSA of randomised clinical trials, and external validity estimation (GRADE). Randomised clinical trials evaluating steroids were included for sepsis patients (systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock) aged > 18 years. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cinahl were searched until 18 February 2015. No language restrictions were applied. Primary outcomes were mortality at longest follow-up and serious adverse events. A total of 35 trials randomising 4682 patients were assessed and reviewed in full text. All trials but two had high risk of bias. No statistically significant effect was found for any dose of steroids versus placebo or no intervention on mortality at maximal follow-up [relative risk (RR) 0.89; TSA adjusted confidence interval (CI) 0.74-1.08]. Two trials with low risk of bias also showed no statistically significant difference (random-effects model RR 0.38, 95 % CI 0.06-2.42). Similar results were obtained in subgroups of trials stratified according to high (> 500 mg) or low (a parts per thousand currency sign500 mg) dose hydrocortisone (or equivalent) (RR 0.87; TSA-adjusted CI 0.38-1.99; and RR 0.90; TSA-adjusted CI 0.49-1.67, respectively). There were also no statistically significant effects on serious adverse events other than mortality (RR 1.02; TSA-adjusted CI 0.7-1.48). The effects did not vary according to the degree of sepsis. TSA showed that many more randomised patients are needed before definitive conclusions may be drawn. Evidence to support or negate the use of steroids in any dose in sepsis patients is lacking. The results of ongoing and future well-designed, large randomised clinical trials are needed

Clinical examination, critical care ultrasonography and outcomes in the critically ill : cohort profile of the Simple Intensive Care Studies-I

Purpose In the Simple Intensive Care Studies-I (SICS-I), we aim to unravel the value of clinical and haemodynamic variables obtained by physical examination and critical care ultrasound (CCUS) that currently guide daily practice in critically ill patients. We intend to (1) measure all available clinical and haemodynamic variables, (2) train novices in obtaining values for advanced variables based on CCUS in the intensive care unit (ICU) and (3) create an infrastructure for a registry with the flexibility of temporarily incorporating specific (haemodynamic) research questions and variables. The overall purpose is to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of clinical and haemodynamic variables. Participants The SICS-I includes all patients acutely admitted to the ICU of a tertiary teaching hospital in the Netherlands with an ICU stay expected to last beyond 24 hours. Inclusion started on 27 March 2015. Findings to date On 31 December 2016, 791 eligible patients fulfilled our inclusion criteria of whom 704 were included. So far 11 substudies with additional variables have been designed, of which six were feasible to implement in the basic study, and two are planned and awaiting initiation. All researchers received focused training for obtaining specific CCUS images. An independent Core laboratory judged that 632 patients had CCUS images of sufficient quality. Future plans We intend to optimise the set of variables for assessment of the haemodynamic status of the critically ill patient used for guiding diagnostics, prognosis and interventions. Repeated evaluations of these sets of variables are needed for continuous improvement of the diagnostic and prognostic models. Future plans include: (1) more advanced imaging; (2) repeated clinical and haemodynamic measurements; (3) expansion of the registry to other departments or centres; and (4) exploring possibilities of integration of a randomised clinical trial superimposed on the registry. Study registration number NCT02912624; Pre-results.Peer reviewe

Standardized EEG interpretation accurately predicts prognosis after cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: To identify reliable predictors of outcome in comatose patients after cardiac arrest using a single routine EEG and standardized interpretation according to the terminology proposed by the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society. METHODS: In this cohort study, 4 EEG specialists, blinded to outcome, evaluated prospectively recorded EEGs in the Target Temperature Management trial (TTM trial) that randomized patients to 33°C vs 36°C. Routine EEG was performed in patients still comatose after rewarming. EEGs were classified into highly malignant (suppression, suppression with periodic discharges, burst-suppression), malignant (periodic or rhythmic patterns, pathological or nonreactive background), and benign EEG (absence of malignant features). Poor outcome was defined as best Cerebral Performance Category score 3-5 until 180 days. RESULTS: Eight TTM sites randomized 202 patients. EEGs were recorded in 103 patients at a median 77 hours after cardiac arrest; 37% had a highly malignant EEG and all had a poor outcome (specificity 100%, sensitivity 50%). Any malignant EEG feature had a low specificity to predict poor prognosis (48%) but if 2 malignant EEG features were present specificity increased to 96% (p &lt; 0.001). Specificity and sensitivity were not significantly affected by targeted temperature or sedation. A benign EEG was found in 1% of the patients with a poor outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Highly malignant EEG after rewarming reliably predicted poor outcome in half of patients without false predictions. An isolated finding of a single malignant feature did not predict poor outcome whereas a benign EEG was highly predictive of a good outcome

Evidence at a glance: error matrix approach for overviewing available evidence

Contains fulltext : 88651.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Clinical evidence continues to expand and is increasingly difficult to overview. We aimed at conceptualizing a visual assessment tool, i.e., a matrix for overviewing studies and their data in order to assess the clinical evidence at a glance. METHODS: A four-step matrix was constructed using the three dimensions of systematic error, random error, and design error. Matrix step I ranks the identified studies according to the dimensions of systematic errors and random errors. Matrix step II orders the studies according to the design errors. Matrix step III assesses the three dimensions of errors in studies. Matrix step IV assesses the size and direction of the intervention effect. RESULTS: The application of this four-step matrix is illustrated with two examples: peri-operative beta-blockade initialized in relation to surgery versus placebo for major non-cardiac surgery, and antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. When clinical evidence is deemed both internally and externally valid, the size of the intervention effect is to be assessed. CONCLUSION: The error matrix provides an overview of the validity of the available evidence at a glance, and may assist in deciding which interventions to use in clinical practice

New-onset atrial fibrillation in the intensive care unit : Protocol for an international inception cohort study (AFIB-ICU)

Introduction New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is frequently observed in critically ill patients and may be associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased mortality. Considerable variation exists in the reported frequencies of NOAF due to the lack of a standardised definition and detection method. Importantly, there are limited data on NOAF in the intensive care unit (ICU). Thus, we aim to provide contemporary epidemiological data on NOAF in the ICU. Methods and Analysis We have designed an international inception cohort study including at least 1,000 consecutive adult patients acutely admitted to the ICU without prior history of persistent or permanent AF. We will present data on the incidence, risk factors, used management strategies and outcomes of NOAF. We will register data daily during stay in the ICU for a maximum of 90 days after admission. The incidence of NOAF and management strategies used will be presented descriptively, and we will use Cox regression analyses including competing risk analyses to assess risk factors for NOAF and any association with 90-day mortality. Conclusion The outlined international AFIB-ICU inception cohort study will provide contemporary data on the incidence, risk factors, used management strategies and outcomes of NOAF in adult ICU patients. Ethics and dissemination This observational study poses no risk to the included patients. All participating sites will obtain relevant approvals according to national laws before patient enrollment. Funding sources will have no influence on data handling, analyses or writing of the manuscript. The study report(s) will be submitted to an international peer-reviewed journal.Peer reviewe