Unexplained mortality differences between septic shock trials: a systematic analysis of population characteristics and control-group mortality rates

脓毒性休克试验中无法解释的死亡率差异:对人群特征和对照组死亡率的系统分析

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although the definition of septic shock has been standardized, some variation in mortality rates among clinical trials is expected. Insights into the sources of heterogeneity may influence the design and interpretation of septic shock studies. We set out to identify inclusion criteria and baseline characteristics associated with between-trial differences in control group mortality rates. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of RCTs published between 2006 and 2018 that included patients with septic shock. The percentage of variance in control-group mortality attributable to study heterogeneity rather than chance was measured by I(2). The association between control-group mortality and population characteristics was estimated using linear mixed models and a recursive partitioning algorithm. RESULTS: Sixty-five septic shock RCTs were included. Overall control-group mortality was 38.6%, with significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 93%, P < 0.0001) and a 95% prediction interval of 13.5-71.7%. The mean mortality rate did not differ between trials with different definitions of hypotension, infection or vasopressor or mechanical ventilation inclusion criteria. Population characteristics univariately associated with mortality rates were mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (standardized regression coefficient (β) = 0.57, P = 0.007), mean serum creatinine (β = 0.48, P = 0.007), the proportion of patients on mechanical ventilation (β = 0.61, P < 0.001), and the proportion with vasopressors (β = 0.57, P = 0.002). Combinations of population characteristics selected with a linear model and recursive partitioning explained 41 and 42%, respectively, of the heterogeneity in mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Among 65 septic shock trials, there was a clinically relevant amount of heterogeneity in control group mortality rates which was explained only partly by differences in inclusion criteria and reported baseline characteristics.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。