Abstract
PURPOSE: Optimal oxygenation targets for patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in the intensive care unit (ICU) are not clearly defined due to substantial variability in design of previous trials. This study aimed to perform a pre-specified individual patient data meta-analysis of the Handling Oxygenation Targets in the ICU (HOT-ICU) and the Handling Oxygenation Targets in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (HOT-COVID) trials to compare targeting a partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO(2)) of 8-12 kPa in adult ICU patients, assessing both benefits and harms. METHODS: We assessed 90-day all-cause mortality and days alive without life support in 90 days using a generalised mixed model. Heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) was evaluated in 14 subgroups, and results graded using the Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN). RESULTS: At 90 days, mortality was 40.4% (724/1792) in the 8 kPa group and 40.9% (733/1793) in the 12 kPa group (risk ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-1.07; P = 0.80). No difference was observed in number of days alive without life support. Subgroup analyses indicated more days alive without life support in COVID-19 patients targeting 8 kPa (P = 0.04) (moderate credibility), and lower mortality (P = 0.03) and more days alive without life support (P = 0.02) in cancer-patients targeting 12 kPa (low credibility). CONCLUSION: This study reported no overall differences comparing a PaO(2) target of 8-12 kPa on mortality or days alive without life support in 90 days. Subgroup analyses suggested HTE in patients with COVID-19 (moderate credibility) and cancer (low credibility).