Use of Intravenous Albumin: A Guideline From the International Collaboration for Transfusion Medicine Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Albumin is used commonly across a wide range of clinical settings to improve hemodynamics, to facilitate fluid removal, and to manage complications of cirrhosis. The International Collaboration for Transfusion Medicine Guidelines developed guidelines for the use of albumin in patients requiring critical care, undergoing cardiovascular surgery, undergoing kidney replacement therapy, or experiencing complications of cirrhosis. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cochairs oversaw the guideline development process and the panel included researchers, clinicians, methodologists, and a patient representative. The evidence informing this guideline arises from a systematic review of randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews, in which multiple databases were searched (inception through November 23, 2022). The panel reviewed the data and formulated the guideline recommendations using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. The guidelines were revised after public consultation. RESULTS: The panel made 14 recommendations on albumin use in adult critical care (three recommendations), pediatric critical care (one recommendation), neonatal critical care (two recommendations), cardiovascular surgery (two recommendations), kidney replacement therapy (one recommendation), and complications of cirrhosis (five recommendations). Of the 14 recommendations, two recommendations had moderate certainty of evidence, five recommendations had low certainty of evidence, and seven recommendations had very low certainty of evidence. Two of the 14 recommendations suggested conditional use of albumin for patients with cirrhosis undergoing large-volume paracentesis or with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Twelve of 14 recommendations did not suggest albumin use in a wide variety of clinical situations where albumin commonly is transfused. INTERPRETATION: Currently, few evidence-based indications support the routine use of albumin in clinical practice to improve patient outcomes. These guidelines provide clinicians with actionable recommendations on the use of albumin.

Long-term survival and functional outcomes of critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies: a Canadian multicenter prospective study.

PURPOSE: Patients with hematologic malignancy (HM) commonly develop critical illness. Their long-term survival and functional outcomes have not been well described. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of HM patients admitted to seven Canadian intensive care units (ICUs) (2018-2020). We followed survivors at 7 days, 6 months and 12 months following ICU discharge. The primary outcome was 12-month survival. We evaluated functional outcomes at 6 and 12 months using the functional independent measure (FIM) and short form (SF)-36 as well as variables associated with 12-month survival. RESULTS: We enrolled 414 patients including 35% women. The median age was 61 (interquartile range, IQR: 52-69), median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 9 (IQR: 6-12), and 22% had moderate-severe frailty (clinical frailty scale [CFS] ≥ 6). 51% had acute leukemia, 38% lymphoma/multiple myeloma, and 40% had received a hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT). The most common reasons for ICU admission were acute respiratory failure (50%) and sepsis (40%). Overall, 203 (49%) were alive 7 days post-ICU discharge (ICU survivors). Twelve-month survival of the entire cohort was 21% (43% across ICU survivors). The proportion of survivors with moderate-severe frailty was 42% (at 7 days), 14% (6 months), and 8% (12 months). Median FIM at 7 days was 80 (IQR: 50-109). Physical function, pain, social function, mental health, and emotional well-being were below age- and sex-matched population scores at 6 and 12 months. Frailty, allogeneic HCT, kidney injury, and cardiac complications during ICU were associated with lower 12- month survival. CONCLUSIONS: 49% of all HM patients were alive at 7 days post-ICU discharge, and 21% at 12 months. Survival varied based upon hematologic diagnosis and frailty status. Survivors had important functional disability and impairment in emotional, physical, and general well-being.

Patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: A mixed-methods study of patient and family perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial. DESIGN: This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding. SETTING: Canada and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients. RESULTS: Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Prognostic Factors Associated with Venous Thromboembolism Following Traumatic Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Trauma patients are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis summarizing the association between prognostic factors and the occurrence of VTE following traumatic injury. METHODS: We searched the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from inception to August 2023. We identified studies reporting confounding adjusted associations between patient, injury or post-injury care factors and risk of VTE. We performed meta-analyses of odds ratios (ORs) using the random effects method and assessed individual study risk of bias using the QUIPS tool. RESULTS: We included 31 studies involving 1,981,946 patients. Studies were predominantly observational cohorts from North America. Factors with moderate or higher certainty of association with increased risk of VTE include older age, obesity, male sex, higher injury severity score, pelvic injury, lower extremity injury, spinal injury, delayed VTE prophylaxis, need for surgery and tranexamic acid use. After accounting for other important contributing prognostic variables, a delay in the delivery of appropriate pharmacologic prophylaxis for as little as 24 to 48 hours independently confers a clinically meaningful two-fold increase in incidence of VTE. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the contribution of patient predisposition, the importance of injury pattern, and the impact of potentially modifiable post-injury care on risk of VTE after traumatic injury. These factors should be incorporated into a risk stratification framework to individualize VTE risk assessment and support clinical and academic efforts reduce thromboembolic events among trauma patients.Study TypeSystematic Review & Meta-Analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Pharmacological agents for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department and intensive care unit: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of various i.v. pharmacologic agents used for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED) and ICU. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to enable direct and indirect comparisons between available medications. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed from inception to 2 March 2023 for RCTs comparing two or more procedural sedation and analgesia medications in all patients (adults and children >30 days of age) requiring emergent procedures in the ED or ICU. We focused on the outcomes of sedation recovery time, patient satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs). We performed frequentist random-effects model network meta-analysis and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate certainty in estimates. RESULTS: We included 82 RCTs (8105 patients, 78 conducted in the ED and four in the ICU) of which 52 studies included adults, 23 included children, and seven included both. Compared with midazolam-opioids, recovery time was shorter with propofol (mean difference 16.3 min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.4-24.3 fewer minutes; high certainty), and patient satisfaction was better with ketamine-propofol (mean difference 1.5 points, 95% CI 0.3-2.6 points, high certainty). Regarding AEs, compared with midazolam-opioids, respiratory AEs were less frequent with ketamine (relative risk [RR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.96; high certainty), gastrointestinal AEs were more common with ketamine-midazolam (RR 3.08, 95% CI 1.15-8.27; high certainty), and neurological AEs were more common with ketamine-propofol (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.08-12.53; high certainty). CONCLUSION: When considering procedural sedation and analgesia in the ED and ICU, compared with midazolam-opioids, sedation recovery time is shorter with propofol, patient satisfaction is better with ketamine-propofol, and respiratory adverse events are less common with ketamine.

Prognostic factors associated with mortality in acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF) increases mortality risk, but which factors increase mortality is unknown. We aimed to perform a prognostic review of factors associated with mortality in patients with IPF. STUDY DESIGN: and methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for studies that reported on the association between any prognostic factor and AE-IPF. We assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS tool. We conduced pairwise meta-analyses using REML heterogeneity estimator, and GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 35 studies in our analysis. We found that long-term supplemental oxygen at baseline (aHR 2.52 [95 % CI 1.68 to 3.80]; moderate certainty) and a diagnosis of IPF compared to non-IPF ILD (aHR 2.19 [95 % CI 1.22 to 3.92]; moderate certainty) is associated with a higher risk of death in patients with AE-IPF. A diffuse pattern on high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) compared to a non-diffuse pattern (aHR 2.61 [95 % CI 1.32 to 2.90]; moderate certainty) is associated with a higher risk of death in patients with AE-IPF. We found that using corticosteroids prior to hospital admission (aHR 2.19 [95 % CI 1.26 to 3.82]; moderate certainty) and those with increased neutrophils (by % increase) in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) during the exacerbation is associated with a higher risk of death (aHR 1.02 [1.01 to 1.04]; moderate certainty). INTERPRETATION: Our results have implications for healthcare providers in making treatment decisions and prognosticating the clinical trajectory of patients, for researchers to design future interventions to improve patient trajectory, and for guideline developers in making decisions about resource allocation.

Calcineurin Inhibition in Deceased Organ Donors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Preclinical Studies.

Background: Preconditioning deceased organ donors with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) may reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury to improve transplant outcomes. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings for animal models of organ donation and transplantation, comparing donor treatment with CNIs with either placebo or no intervention, and evaluating outcomes for organ transplantation. Reviewers independently screened and selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and clinical relevance of included studies. Where possible, we pooled results using meta-analysis; otherwise, we summarized findings descriptively. Results: Eighteen studies used various animals and a range of CNI agents and doses and evaluated their effects on a variety of transplant outcomes. The risk of bias and clinical applicability were poorly reported. Pooled analyses suggested benefit of CNI treatment on early graft function in renal transplants (3 studies; serum creatinine: ratio of means [RoM] 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-0.86) but not for liver transplants (2 studies; serum alanine transaminase: RoM 0.61; 95% CI, 0.30-1.26; and serum aspartate aminotransferase: RoM 0.58; 95% CI, 0.26-1.31). We found no reduction in graft loss at 7 d (2 studies; risk ratio 0.54; 95% CI, 0.08-3.42). CNI treatment was associated with reduced transplant recipient levels of interleukin-6 (4 studies; RoM 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.70), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (5 studies; RoM 0.36; 95% CI, 0.12-1.03), and cellular apoptosis (4 studies; RoM 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.47). Conclusions: Although this compendium of animal experiments suggests that donor preconditioning with CNIs may improve early kidney graft function, the limited ability to reproduce a true clinical environment in animal experiments and to assess for risk of bias in these experiments is a serious weakness that precludes current clinical application.

Intraoperative use of balanced crystalloids versus 0.9% saline: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: The evidence regarding optimal crystalloid use in the perioperative period remains unclear. As the primary aim of this study, we sought to summarise the data from RCTs examining whether use of balanced crystalloids compared with 0.9% saline (saline) leads to differences in patient-important outcomes. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane library, and Clinicaltrials.gov, from inception until December 15, 2022, and included RCTs that intraoperatively randomised adult participants to receive either balanced fluids or saline. We pooled data using a random-effects model and present risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs), along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed individual study risk of bias using the modified Cochrane tool, and certainty of evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: Of 5959 citations, we included 38 RCTs (n=3776 patients). Pooled analysis showed that intraoperative use of balanced fluids compared with saline had an uncertain effect on postoperative mortality analysed at the longest point of follow-up (RR 1.51, 95% CI: 0.42-5.36) and postoperative need for renal replacement therapy (RR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.56-1.59), both very low certainty. Furthermore, use of balanced crystalloids probably leads to a higher postoperative serum pH (MD 0.05, 95% CI: 0.04-0.06), moderate certainty. CONCLUSIONS: Use of balanced crystalloids, compared with saline, in the perioperative setting has an uncertain effect on mortality and need for renal replacement therapy but probably improves postoperative acid-base status. Further research is needed to determine whether balanced crystalloid use affects patient-important outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42022367593.

Impact of iron supplementation on patient outcomes for women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), which includes heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), is a common condition placing women at increased risk for developing iron deficiency and iron deficiency anemia (IDA). Depletion of iron stores has negative implications on physical, social, and emotional health, as well as quality of life. Iron supplements are safe, effective, and readily available, while red blood cell (RBC) transfusions have inherent risks including infectious and immune reactions. Despite high prevalence of IDA among women with AUB, there are limited studies on the impact of iron therapies on patient outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis will evaluate the impact of iron supplementation on patient outcomes for women with AUB, when compared to combination therapy, no intervention, placebo, or standard of care. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies evaluating the impact of iron interventions on patient outcomes for women with AUB. Systematic literature searches will be conducted in major databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Studies assessing the impact of iron interventions on patient outcomes in women experiencing AUB, in comparison to combination therapy, no intervention, placebo, or standard of care, will be included in the review. Independent reviewers will screen for eligibility, assess risk of bias, and abstract data. Overall certainty of evidence for each outcome will be assessed using the GRADE approach. We will meta-analyze outcomes which are sufficiently homogeneous to summarize intervention effects and narratively synthesize nonhomogeneous outcomes. The main outcomes of interest are hemoglobin levels immediately prior to surgery and post-operatively, number of RBC transfusions, and adverse effects. Secondary outcomes will include length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, adverse and side effects, quality of life, and iron indices. DISCUSSION: This review will evaluate the impact of iron interventions on patient outcomes in women with IDA secondary to AUB with focus on changes in hematological and iron indices, red blood cell utilization, quality of life, cost of treatment, and adverse events. The results will inform evidence-based clinical practice for the management of iron deficiency and IDA secondary to AUB. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019137282.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of sample size methodology for traumatic hemorrhage trials.

BACKGROUND: Trauma hemorrhage remains the most common cause of preventable mortality in trauma. To guide clinical practice, RCTs provide high-quality evidence to inform clinical decision making. The clinical relevance and inferences made by RCTs are dependent on assumptions made during sample size calculation. METHODS: To describe the quality of methodology for sample size determination, we conducted a systemic review RCTs evaluating interventions that aim to improve survival in adults with trauma-related hemorrhage. Estimated and actual outcome data are compared, including components of sample size determination. RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs were included. We noted a high rate of negative trial results (11 of 13 studies). Most studies were multi-center and conducted in North America, evaluating patients with blunt and penetrating injuries. The criteria for hemorrhagic shock varied across studies. All studies did not accurately estimate the mortality rate during sample size calculation. All but one study overestimated the mortality reduction during sample size calculation; the median absolute mortality reduction was 3%, compared with a target of 10%. Only the CRASH-2 study used a minimal clinically important different for treatment effect target. No RCTs employed prognostic enrichment. Most studies were terminated (8 of 13), mainly for futility. CONCLUSION: Taken together, this review highlights that current clinical trial methodology is limited by imprecise control group risk estimates, overly optimistic treatment effect estimates, and lack of transparent justification for such targets. These limitations result in studies at high risk for futility and potentially premature abandonment of promising therapies. Given the high morbidity and mortality of trauma-related hemorrhage, we recommend that future conduct of trauma RCTs incorporate (1) prognostic enrichment to inform baseline risk, (2) justify target treatment differences based on clinical importance and realistic estimates of feasibility, and (3) be transparent and provide justification for the assumptions made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis; Level III.

Efficacy of high dose tranexamic acid (TXA) for hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Standard dose (≤ 1 g) tranexamic acid (TXA) has established mortality benefit in trauma patients. The role of high dose IV TXA (≥2 g or ≥30 mg/kg as a single bolus) has been evaluated in the surgical setting, however, it has not been studied in trauma. We reviewed the available evidence of high dose IV TXA in any setting with the goal of informing its use in the adult trauma population. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and unpublished sources from inception until July 27, 2022 for studies that compared standard dose with high dose IV TXA in adults (≥ 16 years of age) with hemorrhage. Screening and data abstraction was done independently and in duplicate. We pooled trial data using a random effects model and considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies separately. We assessed the individual study risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational cohort studies. The overall certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RESULTS: We included 20 studies with a combined total of 12,523 patients. Based on pooled RCT data, and as compared to standard dose TXA, high dose IV TXA probably decreases transfusion requirements (odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 0.97, moderate certainty) but with possibly no effect on blood loss (mean difference [MD] 43.31 ml less, 95% CI 135.53 to 48.90 ml less, low certainty), and an uncertain effect on thromboembolic events (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.04, very low certainty) and mortality (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.32, very low certainty). CONCLUSION: When compared to standard dose, high dose IV TXA probably reduces transfusion requirements with an uncertain effect on thromboembolic events and mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level IV.

The prevalence and outcomes of frail older adults in clinical trials in multiple myeloma: A systematic review.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable blood cancer that primarily affects older adults. Several frailty tools have been developed to address the heterogeneity of aging in this population. Uptake of these measures has been variable, leading to a gap in knowledge regarding the proportion of enrolled trial participants considered frail and uncertainty in the treatment-related effects and outcomes among this high-risk population. We performed a systematic review of therapeutic interventional MM clinical trials reporting on frailty. We included 43 clinical trials (24 randomized controlled trials and 19 non-randomized trials) which met eligibility criteria. Frailty was increasingly incorporated in studies in more recent years with 41.9% of included studies being reported in the last two years. Commonly used frailty tools included the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty index (41.8%), and the simplified frailty score (39.5%). Frailty status was categorized with 3 levels as (frail, intermediate fit, or fit) in 51.2% of the studies and dichotomized (frail, non-frail) in 18.6% of studies. Frailty prevalence greatly varied across trials ranging from 17.2% to 73.6% of the cohort. Of the included studies, 72.0% conducted subgroup analysis (planned or post-hoc) based on frailty status. Most studies demonstrated a consistent benefit of MM interventions among the frail and non-frail populations, however in general, frail patients had worse outcomes compared to the fit. Although frailty is increasingly being incorporated in MM clinical trials, due to the variation in both the definition and categorization of frailty, there remains heterogeneity in the prevalence of frailty and its potential associated impact on outcomes.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-Xa-Guided Versus Fixed Dosing of Low Molecular Weight Heparin for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Trauma patients are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We summarize the comparative efficacy and safety of anti-Xa-guided versus fixed dosing for low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for the prevention of VTE in adult trauma patients. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase from inception through June 1, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials or observational studies comparing anti-Xa-guided versus fixed dosing of LMWH for thromboprophylaxis in adult trauma patients. We incorporated primary data from 2 large observational cohorts. We pooled effect estimates using a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias using the ROBINS-I tool for observational studies and assessed certainty of findings using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: We included 15 observational studies involving 10,348 patients. No randomized controlled trials were identified. determined that, compared to fixed LMWH dosing, anti-Xa-guided dosing may reduce deep vein thrombosis [adjusted odds ratio (aOR); 0.52, 95% CI: 0.40-0.69], pulmonary embolism (aOR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.30-0.78) or any VTE (aOR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.42-0.69), though all estimates are based on low certainty evidence. There was an uncertain effect on mortality (aOR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.85-1.32) and bleeding events (aOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.50-1.39), limited by serious imprecision. We used several sensitivity and subgroup analyses to confirm the validity of our assumptions. CONCLUSION: Anti-Xa-guided dosing may be more effective than fixed dosing for prevention of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and VTE for adult trauma patients. These promising findings justify the need for a high-quality randomized study with the potential to deliver practice changing results.

In adults hospitalized with COVID-19, adding baricitinib vs. dexamethasone to remdesivir did not differ for MV-free survival.

SOURCE CITATION: Wolfe CR, Tomashek KM, Patterson TF, et al. Baricitinib versus dexamethasone for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACTT-4): a randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2022;10:888-99. 35617986.

Adverse effects of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir when used for COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: To summarise specific adverse effects of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched 32 databases through 27 October 2020. We included randomised trials comparing any of the drugs of interest to placebo or standard care, or against each other. We conducted fixed-effects pairwise meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation approach. RESULTS: We included 16 randomised trials which enrolled 8152 patients. For most interventions and outcomes the certainty of the evidence was very low to low except for gastrointestinal adverse effects from hydroxychloroquine, which was moderate certainty. Compared with standard care or placebo, low certainty evidence suggests that remdesivir may not have an important effect on acute kidney injury (risk difference (RD) 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 27 fewer to 21 more) or cognitive dysfunction/delirium (RD 3 more per 1000, 95% CI 12 fewer to 19 more). Low certainty evidence suggests that hydroxychloroquine may increase the risk of cardiac toxicity (RD 10 more per 1000, 95% CI 0 more to 30 more) and cognitive dysfunction/delirium (RD 33 more per 1000, 95% CI 18 fewer to 84 more), whereas moderate certainty evidence suggests hydroxychloroquine probably increases the risk of diarrhoea (RD 106 more per 1000, 95% CI 48 more to 175 more) and nausea and/or vomiting (RD 62 more per 1000, 95% CI 23 more to 110 more) compared with standard care or placebo. Low certainty evidence suggests lopinavir/ritonavir may increase the risk of diarrhoea (RD 168 more per 1000, 95% CI 58 more to 330 more) and nausea and/or vomiting (RD 160 more per 1000, 95% CI 100 more to 210 more) compared with standard care or placebo. DISCUSSION: Hydroxychloroquine probably increases the risk of diarrhoea and nausea and/or vomiting and may increase the risk of cardiac toxicity and cognitive dysfunction/delirium. Lopinavir/ritonavir may increase the risk of diarrhoea and nausea and/or vomiting. Remdesivir may have no important effect on risk of acute kidney injury or cognitive dysfunction/delirium. These findings provide important information to support the development of evidence-based management strategies for patients with COVID-19.

Prognostic Factors Associated With Development of Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify prognostic factors for the development of venous thromboembolism in the ICU. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to March 1, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: We included English-language studies describing prognostic factors associated with the development of venous thromboembolism among critically ill patients. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors performed data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment. We pooled adjusted odds ratios and adjusted hazard ratios for prognostic factors using random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 39 observational cohort studies involving 729,477 patients. Patient factors with high or moderate certainty of association with increased odds of venous thromboembolism include older age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.29 per 10 yr), obesity (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18-1.32), active malignancy (adjusted odds ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.18-2.44), history of venous thromboembolism (adjusted odds ratio, 4.77; 95% CI, 3.42-6.65), and history of recent surgery (adjusted odds ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.26-2.47). ICU-specific factors with high or moderate certainty of association with increased risk of venous thromboembolism include sepsis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.12-1.78), lack of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.14-2.84), central venous catheter (adjusted odds ratio, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.98-4.34), invasive mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.36-2.24), and use of vasoactive medication (adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.23-2.81). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides quantitative summaries of the association between patient-specific and ICU-related prognostic factors and the risk of venous thromboembolism in the ICU. These findings provide the foundation for the development of a venous thromboembolism risk stratification tool for critically ill patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Low Molecular Weight Heparin Versus Unfractionated Heparin for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Trauma patients are at high risk of VTE. We summarize the efficacy and safety of LMWH versus UFH for the prevention of VTE in trauma patients. METHODS: We searched 6 databases from inception through March 12, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies comparing LMWH versus UFH for thromboprophylaxis in adult trauma patients. We pooled effect estimates across RCTs and observational studies separately, using random-effects model and inverse variance weighting. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies (ROBINS)-I tool for observational studies and assessed certainty of findings using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology. RESULTS: We included 4 RCTs (879 patients) and 8 observational studies (306,747 patients). Based on pooled RCT data, compared to UFH, LMWH reduces deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.88, moderate certainty) and VTE (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.90, moderate certainty). As compared to UFH, LMWH may reduce pulmonary embolism [adjusted odds ratio from pooled observational studies 0.56 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.62)] and mortality (adjusted odds ratio from pooled observational studies 0.54, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.65), though based on low certainty evidence. There was an uncertain effect on adverse events (RR from pooled RCTs 0.80, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.33, very low certainty) and heparin induced thrombocytopenia [RR from pooled RCTs 0.26 (95% CI 0.03 to 2.38, very low certainty)]. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult trauma patients, LMWH is superior to UFH for deep vein thrombosis and VTE prevention and may additionally reduce pulmonary embolism and mortality. The impact on adverse events and heparin induced thrombocytopenia is uncertain.

Prognostic factors associated with development of infected necrosis in patients with acute necrotizing or severe pancreatitis-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Acute pancreatitis is a potentially life-threatening condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentation and illness severity. An infection of pancreatic necrosis (IPN) results in a more than twofold increase in mortality risk as compared with patients with sterile necrosis. We sought to identify prognostic factors for the development of IPN among adult patients with severe or necrotizing pancreatitis. METHODS: We conducted this prognostic review in accordance with systematic review methodology guidelines. We searched six databases from inception through March 21, 2021. We included English language studies describing prognostic factors associated with the development of IPN. We pooled unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for prognostic factors using a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included 31 observational studies involving 5,210 patients. Factors with moderate or higher certainty of association with increased IPN risk include older age (uOR, 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-3.45, moderate certainty), gallstone etiology (aOR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.36-4.04, high certainty), greater than 50% necrosis of the pancreas (aOR, 3.61; 95% CI, 2.15-6.04, high certainty), delayed enteral nutrition (aOR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.26-3.47, moderate certainty), multiple or persistent organ failure (aOR, 11.71; 95% CI, 4.97-27.56, high certainty), and invasive mechanical ventilation (uOR, 12.24; 95% CI, 2.28-65.67, high certainty). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms the association between several clinical early prognostic factors and the risk of IPN development among patients with severe or necrotizing pancreatitis. These findings provide the foundation for the development of an IPN risk stratification tool to guide more targeted clinical trials for prevention or early intervention strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, Level IV.

In COVID-19, tocilizumab reduces all-cause mortality at 28 d.

SOURCE CITATION: Ghosn L, Chaimani A, Evrenoglou T, et al. Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;3:CD013881. 33734435.