Predictors of mortality in severe pneumonia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Severe pneumonia has consistently been associated with high mortality. We sought to identify risk factors for the mortality of severe pneumonia to assist in reducing mortality for medical treatment. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were systematically searched till June 1, 2023. All human research were incorporated into the analysis, regardless of language, publication date, or geographical location. To pool the estimate, a mixed-effect model was used. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed for assessing the quality of included studies that were included in the analysis. RESULTS: In total, 22 studies with a total of 3655 severe pneumonia patients and 1107 cases (30.29%) of death were included in the current meta-analysis. Significant associations were found between age [5.76 years, 95% confidence interval [CI] (3.43, 8.09), P < 0.00001], male gender [odds ratio (OR) = 1.47, 95% CI (1.07, 2.02), P = 0.02], and risk of death from severe pneumonia. The comorbidity of neoplasm [OR = 3.37, 95% CI (1.07, 10.57), P = 0.04], besides the presence of complications such as diastolic hypotension [OR = 2.60, 95% CI (1.45, 4.67), P = 0.001], ALI/ARDS [OR = 3.63, 95% CI (1.78, 7.39), P = 0.0004], septic shock [OR = 9.43, 95% CI (4.39, 20.28), P < 0.00001], MOF [OR = 4.34, 95% CI (2.36, 7.95), P < 0.00001], acute kidney injury [OR = 2.45, 95% CI (1.14, 5.26), P = 0.02], and metabolic acidosis [OR = 5.88, 95% CI (1.51, 22.88), P = 0.01] were associated with significantly higher risk of death among patients with severe pneumonia. Those who died, compared with those who survived, differed on multiple biomarkers on admission including serum creatinine [Scr: + 67.77 mmol/L, 95% CI (47.21, 88.34), P < 0.00001], blood urea nitrogen [BUN: + 6.26 mmol/L, 95% CI (1.49, 11.03), P = 0.01], C-reactive protein [CRP: + 33.09 mg/L, 95% CI (3.01, 63.18), P = 0.03], leukopenia [OR = 2.63, 95% CI (1.34, 5.18), P = 0.005], sodium < 136 mEq/L [OR = 2.63, 95% CI (1.34, 5.18), P = 0.005], albumin [- 5.17 g/L, 95% CI (- 7.09, - 3.25), P < 0.00001], PaO2/FiO2 [- 55.05 mmHg, 95% CI (- 60.11, - 50.00), P < 0.00001], arterial blood PH [- 0.09, 95% CI (- 0.15, - 0.04), P = 0.0005], gram-negative microorganism [OR = 2.56, 95% CI (1.17, 5.62), P = 0.02], and multilobar or bilateral involvement [OR = 3.65, 95% CI (2.70, 4.93), P < 0.00001]. CONCLUSIONS: Older age and male gender might face a greater risk of death in severe pneumonia individuals. The mortality of severe pneumonia may also be significantly impacted by complications such diastolic hypotension, ALI/ARDS, septic shock, MOF, acute kidney injury, and metabolic acidosis, as well as the comorbidity of neoplasm, and laboratory indicators involving Scr, BUN, CRP, leukopenia, sodium, albumin, PaO2/FiO2, arterial blood PH, gram-negative microorganism, and multilobar or bilateral involvement. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Protocol Number: CRD 42023430684.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation technology for adults: an evidence mapping based on systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a cutting-edge life-support measure for patients with severe cardiac and pulmonary illnesses. Although there are several systematic reviews (SRs) about ECMO, it remains to be seen how quality they are and how efficacy and safe the information about ECMO they describe is in these SRs. Therefore, performing an overview of available SRs concerning ECMO is crucial. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases from inception to January 2023 to identify SRs with or without meta-analyses. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) tool, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system were used to assess the methodological quality, and evidence quality for SRs, respectively. A bubble plot was used to visually display clinical topics, literature size, number of SRs, evidence quality, and an overall estimate of efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 17 SRs met eligibility criteria, which were combined into 9 different clinical topics. The methodological quality of the included SRs in this mapping was "Critically low" to "Moderate". One of the SRs was high-quality evidence, three on moderate, three on low, and two on very low-quality evidence. The most prevalent study used to evaluate ECMO technology was observational or cohort study with frequently small sample sizes. ECMO has been proven beneficial for severe ARDS and ALI due to the H1N1 influenza infection. For ARDS, ALF or ACLF, and cardiac arrest were concluded to be probably beneficial. For dependent ARDS, ARF, ARF due to the H1N1 influenza pandemic, and cardiac arrest of cardiac origin came to an inconclusive conclusion. There was no evidence for a harmful association between ECMO and the range of clinical topics. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited available evidence for ECMO that large sample, multi-center, and multinational RCTs are needed. Most clinical topics are reported as beneficial or probably beneficial of SRs for ECMO. Evidence mapping is a valuable and reliable methodology to identify and present the existing evidence about therapeutic interventions.

Efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine adjuvant therapy for severe pneumonia: evidence mapping of the randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

Background and Objective: Severe pneumonia is a critical respiratory disease with high mortality. There is insufficient evidence on the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) adjuvant therapy for severe pneumonia. This study aims to identify, describe, assess, and summarize the currently available high-quality design evidence on TCM adjuvant therapy for severe pneumonia to identify evidence gaps using the evidence mapping approach. Methods: Systematic searches were performed on English and Chinese online databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, CQVIP, and SinoMed) to identify papers from inception until August 2023 for inclusion into the review. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs), and meta-analyses concerning TCM adjuvant therapy for severe pneumonia or its complications in adults were included. The risk of bias in RCTs was evaluated by using the Cochrane Handbook ROB tool. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Risk of Bias in Systematic Review (ROBIS) tool, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system were used to assess the methodological quality, risk of bias, and evidence quality of SRs or meta-analyses, respectively. Then, a bubble plot was designed to visually display information in four dimensions. Results: A total of 354 RCTs and 17 SRs or meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. The published RCTs had several flaws, such as unreasonable design, limited sample size, insufficient attention to non-drug therapy studies and syndrome differentiation, improper selection or use of outcome indicators, and failure to provide high-quality evidence. Sixteen SRs or meta-analyses of methodological quality scored "Critically Low" confidence. Twelve SRs or meta-analyses were rated as "High Risk." Most outcomes were rated as "Low" evidence quality. We found that TCM combined with conventional treatment could improve the clinical total effective rate and the TCM syndromes efficacy. The combined approach could also shorten mechanical ventilation time, infection control time, and length of hospital and ICU stay; significantly reduce temperature, respiratory rate, heart rate, white blood cell counts, levels of C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, blood inflammatory factors, bacteriological response, and D-dimer; decrease CPIS, APACHE II score, and PSI score; improve pulmonary imaging features, arterial blood gas indicators (including arterial oxygen pressure, arterial oxygen saturation, and oxygen index), and lung function (including forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in the first second) for severe pneumonia compared with conventional treatment only (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in adverse reactions and incidence of adverse events (p > 0.05). In addition, compared with conventional treatment only, most SRs or meta-analyses concluded that TCM combined with conventional treatment was "Beneficial" or "Probably beneficial." Conclusion: TCM combined with conventional treatment had advantages in efficacy, clinical signs, laboratory results, and life quality outcomes of severe pneumonia, with no difference in safety outcomes compared with conventional treatment only. QingJin Huatan decoction is the most promising target, and Xuanbai Chengqi decoction has a "Probably beneficial" conclusion. XueBiJing injection and TanReQing injection are two commonly used Chinese herbal injections for treating severe pneumonia, and both are "Probably beneficial." However, there was a need for multicenter RCTs with large sample sizes and high methodological quality in the future. In addition, the methodological design and quality of SRs or meta-analyses should be improved to form high-quality, evidence-based medical evidence and provide evidence for the effectiveness and safety of TCM adjuvant therapy for severe pneumonia.

[Network Meta-analysis of different Chinese medicine injections combined with conventional therapy in treatment of stroke-associated pneumonia].

Network Meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of different Chinese medicine injections combined with conventional therapy in the treatment of stroke-associated pneumonia. CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for the relevant literature pubslished from inception to April 1, 2022. Stata 17 was used for data analysis. After screening of 1 189 papers, 72 studies were finally selected, which involved 5 819 patients and 6 Chinese medicine injections(Tanreqing Injection, Xingnaojing Injection, Xuebijing Injection, Xiyanping Injection, Shenfu Injection, and Shenmai Injection). The network Meta-analysis ranked the injections as follows.(1) In terms of improving the total clinical effective rate, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve(SUCRA) followed the order of Xiyanping Injection + conventional therapy > Xuebijing Injection + conventional therapy > Tanreqing Injection + conventional therapy > Shenmai Injection + conventional therapy > Xingnaojing Injection + conventional therapy > Shenfu Injection + conventional therapy > conventional therapy.(2) In terms of recovering the National Institute of Health stroke scale(NIHSS) scores, the SUCRA followed the order of Xuebijing Injection + conventional therapy > Xingnaojing Injection + conventional therapy > Tanreqing Injection + conventional therapy > Shenfu Injection + conventional therapy > conventional therapy.(3) In reducing the average time to abatement of fever, the SUCRA followed the order of Xiyanping Injection + conventional therapy > Tanreqing Injection + conventional therapy > Xuebijing Injection + conventional therapy > conventional therapy.(4) In terms of reducing the mean hospital stay, the SUCRA followed the order of Xiyanping Injection + conventional therapy > Xubijing Injection + conventional therapy > Tanreqing Injection + conventional therapy > Shenmai Injection + conventional therapy > conventional therapy. The clinical efficacy of Tanreqing Injection, Xuebijing Injection, Xiyanping Injection, Xingnaojing Injection, Shenmai Injection, or Shenfu Injection combined with conventional therapy was superior to that of conventional therapy alone. However, due to the limitations of the quality and methodology of different intervention measures, this conclusion needs to be verified by more high-quality and rigorously designed randomized controlled trial.