Physical Rehabilitation and Mobilization in Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Life Support: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: We planned to synthesize evidence examining the potential efficacy and safety of performing physical rehabilitation and/or mobilization (PR&M) in adult patients receiving extracorporeal life support (ECLS). DATA SOURCES: We included any study that compared PR&M to no PR&M or among different PR&M strategies in adult patients receiving any ECLS for any indication and any cannulation. We searched seven electronic databases with no language limitations. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers, independently and in duplicate, screened all citations for eligibility. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 and Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tools to assess individual study risk of bias. Although we had planned for meta-analysis, this was not possible due to insufficient data, so we used narrative and tabular data summaries for presenting results. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 17 studies that enrolled 996 patients. Most studies examined venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and/or venoarterial ECMO as a bridge to recovery in the ICU. We found an uncertain effect of high-intensity/active PR&M on mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, or quality of life compared with low-intensity/passive PR&M in patients receiving ECLS (very low certainty due to very serious imprecision). There was similarly an uncertain effect on safety events including clinically important bleeding, spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage, limb ischemia, accidental decannulation, or ECLS circuit dysfunction (very low certainty due to very serious risk of bias and imprecision). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available summary of evidence, there is an uncertain effect of high-intensity/active PR&M on patient important outcomes or safety in patients receiving ECLS. Despite indirect data from other populations suggesting potential benefit of high-intensity PR&M in the ICU; further high-quality randomized trials evaluating the benefits and risks of physical therapy and/or mobilization in this population are needed.

Impact of a COVID-19 code blue protocol on resuscitation care and CPR quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the impact of a COVID-19 Code Blue policy on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) processes of care, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality metrics, and survival to hospital discharge. METHODS: We completed a health record review of consecutive IHCA for which resuscitation was attempted. We report Utstein outcomes and CPR quality metrics 33 months before (July,2017-March,2020) and after (April,2020-December,2022) the implementation of a COVID-19 Code Blue policy requiring all team members to don personal protective equipment including gown, gloves, mask, and eye protection for all IHCA. RESULTS: There were 800 IHCA with the following characteristics (Before n = 396; After n = 404): mean age 66, 62.9% male, 81.3% witnessed, 31.3% in the emergency department, 25.6% cardiac cause, and initial shockable rhythm in 16.7%. Among all 404 patients screened for COVID-19, 25 of 288 available test results before IHCA occurred were positive. Comparing the before and after periods: there were relevant time delays (min:sec) in start of chest compressions (0:17vs.0:37;p = 0.005), team arrival (0:43vs.1:21;p = 0.002), 1st rhythm analysis (1:15vs.3:16;p < 0.0001), 1st epinephrine (3:44vs.4:34;p = 0.02), and airway insertion (8:38vs. 10:18;p = 0.02). Resuscitation duration was similar (18:28vs.19:35;p = 0.34). Exception of peri-shock pause which appeared longer (0:06vs.0:14;p = 0.07), chest compression fraction, rate and depth were identical and good. Factors independently associated with survival were age (adjOR 0.98;p < 0.001), male sex (adjOR 1.51;p = 0.048), witnessed (adjOR 2.35;p = 0.02), shockable rhythm (adjOR 3.31;p < 0.0001), hospital location (p = 0.0002), and COVID-19 period (adjOR 0.68;p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 Code Blue policy was associated with delayed processes of care but similarly good CPR quality. The COVID-19 period appeared associated with decreased survival.

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.

Glycemic Variability As a Prognostic Factor for Mortality in Patients With Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association of various measures of glycemic variability, including time-domain and complexity-domain, with short-term mortality in patients with critical illness. DATA SOURCES: We searched Embase Classic +, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to November 3, 2023. STUDY SELECTION: We included English language studies that assessed metrics of glycemic variation or complexity and short-term mortality in patients admitted to the ICU. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors performed independent data abstraction and risk-of-bias assessments. We used a random-effects model to pool binary and continuous data and summarized estimates of effect using odds ratios and mean difference. We used the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool to assess risk of bias and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations to assess certainty of pooled estimates. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 41 studies (n = 162,259). We demonstrate that increased sd, coefficient of variance, glycemic lability index, and decreased time in range are probably associated with increased mortality in critically ill patients (moderate certainty) and that increased mean absolute glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursion, and detrended fluctuation analysis may be associated with increased mortality (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: We found a consistent association between increased measures of glycemic variability and higher short-term mortality in patient with critical illness. Further research should focus on standardized measurements of glycemic variation and complexity, along with their utility as therapeutic targets and prognostic markers.

Prognostic factors associated with risk of stroke following blunt cerebrovascular injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) includes carotid and/or vertebral artery injury following trauma, and conveys an increased stroke risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide a comprehensive summary of prognostic factors associated with risk of stroke following BCVI. METHODS: We searched the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from January 1946 to June 2023. We identified studies reporting associations between patient or injury factors and risk of stroke following BCVI. We performed meta-analyses of odds ratios (ORs) using the random effects method and assessed individual study risk of bias using the QUIPS tool. We separately pooled adjusted and unadjusted analyses, highlighting the estimate with the higher certainty. RESULTS: We included 26 cohort studies, involving 20,458 patients with blunt trauma. The overall incidence of stroke following BCVI was 7.7 %. Studies were predominantly retrospective cohorts from North America and included both carotid and vertebral artery injuries. Diagnosis of BCVI was most commonly confirmed with CT angiography. We demonstrated with moderate to high certainty that factors associated with increased risk of stroke included carotid artery injury (as compared to vertebral artery injury, unadjusted odds ratio [uOR] 1.94, 95 % CI 1.62 to 2.32), Grade III Injury (as compared to grade I or II) (uOR 2.45, 95 % CI 1.88 to 3.20), Grade IV injury (uOR 3.09, 95 % CI 2.20 to 4.35), polyarterial injury (uOR 3.11 (95 % CI 2.05 to 4.72), occurrence of hypotension at the time of hospital admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.32, 95 % CI 0.87 to 2.03) and higher total body injury severity (aOR 5.91, 95 % CI 1.90 to 18.39). CONCLUSION: Local anatomical injury pattern, overall burden of injury and flow dynamics contribute to BCVI-related stroke risk. These findings provide the foundational evidence base for risk stratification to support clinical decision making and further research.

Prognostic factors associated with favourable functional outcome among adult patients requiring extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR), has demonstrated promise in the management of refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, evidence from observational studies and clinical trials are conflicting and the factors influencing outcome have not been well established. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis summarizing the association between pre-ECPR prognostic factors and likelihood of good functional outcome among adult patients requiring ECPR for OHCA. We searched Medline and Embase databases from inception to February 28, 2023 and screened studies with two independent reviewers. We performed meta-analyses of unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios, adjusted hazard ratios and mean differences separately. We assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS tool and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. FINDINGS: We included 29 observational and randomized studies involving 7,397 patients. Factors with moderate or high certainty of association with increased survival with favourable functional outcome include pre-arrest patient factors, such as younger age (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, 95% CI 1.52 to 2.99) and female sex (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.70), as well as intra-arrest factors, such as shockable rhythm (OR 2.79, 95% CI 2.04 to 3.80), witnessed arrest (OR 1.68 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.42), bystander CPR (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.01), return of spontaneous circulation (OR 2.81, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.61) and shorter time to cannulation (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.69 per 10 minutes). INTERPRETATION: The findings of this review confirm several clinical concepts wellestablished in the cardiac arrest literature and their applicability to the patient for whom ECPR is considered - that is, the impact of pre-existing patient factors, the benefit of timely and effective CPR, as well as the prognostic importance of minimizing low-flow time. We advocate for the thoughtful consideration of these prognostic factors as part of a risk stratification framework when evaluating a patient's potential candidacy for ECPR.

Association of age with death and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy after severe traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Compared to younger age, older age (≥ 65 yr) is associated with worse outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We sought to describe the association of older age with in-hospital death and aggressiveness of intervention. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult (age ≥ 16 yr) patients with severe TBI admitted to a single academic tertiary care neurotrauma centre between January 2014 and December 2015. We collected data through chart review as well as from our institutional administrative database. We provided descriptive statistics and used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the independent association of age with the primary outcome, in-hospital death. The secondary outcome was early withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. RESULTS: There were 126 adult patients (median age 67 yr [Q1-Q3, 33-80 yr]) with severe TBI during the study period who met our eligibility criteria. The most common mechanism was high-velocity blunt injury (55 patients [43.6%]). The median Marshall score was 4 (Q1-Q3, 2-6), and the median Injury Severity Score was 26 (Q1-Q3, 25-35). After controlling for confounders including clinical frailty, pre-existing comorbidity, injury severity, Marshall score and neurologic examination at admission, we observed that older patients were more likely than younger patients to die in hospital (odds ratio 5.10, 95% confidence interval 1.65-15.78). Older patients were also more likely to experience early withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy and less likely to receive invasive interventions. CONCLUSION: After controlling for confounding factors relevant to older patients, we observed that age was an important and independent predictor of in-hospital death and early withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. The mechanism by which age influences clinical decision-making independent of global and neurologic injury severity, clinical frailty and comorbidities remains unclear.

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.

Pharmacologic Interventions to Prevent Delirium in Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

To compare the relative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions in the prevention of delirium in ICU trauma patients. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Embase, and Cochrane Registry of Clinical Trials from database inception until June 7, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacologic interventions in critically ill trauma patients. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for network analysis were followed. Random-effects models were fit using a Bayesian approach to network meta-analysis. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, each with 95% credible intervals. Treatment rankings were estimated for each outcome in the form of surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total 3,541 citations were screened; six randomized clinical trials (n = 382 patients) were included. Compared with combined propofol-dexmedetomidine, there may be no difference in delirium prevalence with dexmedetomidine (HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.39-6.94), propofol (HR 2.38, 95% CI 0.68-11.36), nor haloperidol (HR 3.38, 95% CI 0.65-21.79); compared with dexmedetomidine alone, there may be no effect with propofol (HR 1.66, 95% CI 0.79-3.69) nor haloperidol (HR 2.30, 95% CI 0.88-6.61). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that there is no difference found between pharmacologic interventions on delirium occurrence, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, or mortality, in trauma ICU patients.

Predictors of Noninvasive Ventilation Failure in the Post-Extubation Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with failure of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in the post-extubation period. DATA SOURCES: We searched Embase Classic +, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to February 28, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: We included English language studies that provided predictors of post-extubation NIV failure necessitating reintubation. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors conducted data abstraction and risk-of-bias assessments independently. We used a random-effects model to pool binary and continuous data and summarized estimates of effect using odds ratios (ORs) mean difference (MD), respectively. We used the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool to assess risk of bias and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations to assess certainty. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 25 studies ( n = 2,327). Illness-related factors associated with increased odds of post-extubation NIV failure were higher critical illness severity (OR, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.96-6.45; high certainty) and a diagnosis of pneumonia (OR, 6.16; 95% CI, 2.59-14.66; moderate certainty). Clinical and biochemical factors associated with moderate certainty of increased risk of NIV failure post-extubation include higher respiratory rate (MD, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.61-2.47), higher heart rate (MD, 4.46; 95% CI, 1.67-7.25), lower Pa o2 :F io2 (MD, -30.78; 95% CI, -50.02 to -11.54) 1-hour after NIV initiation, and higher rapid shallow breathing index (MD, 15.21; 95% CI, 12.04-18.38) prior to NIV start. Elevated body mass index was the only patient-related factor that may be associated with a protective effect (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.09-0.52; moderate certainty) on post-extubation NIV failure. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several prognostic factors before and 1 hour after NIV initiation associated with increased risk of NIV failure in the post-extubation period. Well-designed prospective studies are required to confirm the prognostic importance of these factors to help further guide clinical decision-making.

The impact of time to hemostatic intervention and delayed care for patients with traumatic hemorrhage: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled bleeding is a common cause of preventable mortality in trauma. While it is intuitive that delays to hemostasis may lead to worse outcomes, the impacts of these delays remain incompletely explored. This systematic review aimed to characterize the extant definitions of delayed hemostatic intervention and to quantify the impacts of delays on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science from inception to August 2022. Studies defining "delayed intervention" and those comparing times to intervention among adults presenting to hospital with blunt or penetrating injuries who required major hemostatic intervention were eligible. The coprimary outcomes were mortality and the definition of delay to hemostasis used. Secondary outcomes included units of packed red blood cells received, length of stay in hospital, and length of stay in intensive care. RESULTS: We identified 2,050 studies, with 24 studies including 10,168 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were retrospective observational cohort studies, and most were at high risk of bias. A variety of injury patterns and hemostatic interventions were considered, with 69.6% of studies reporting a statistically significant impact of increased time to intervention on mortality. Definitions of delayed intervention ranged from 10 minutes to 4 hours. Conflicting data were reported for impact of time on receipt of blood products, while one study found a significant impact on intensive care length of stay. No studies assessed length of stay in hospital. CONCLUSION: The extant literature is heterogeneous with respect to injuries included, methods of hemostasis employed, and durations of delay examined. While the majority of the included studies demonstrated a statistically significant relationship between time to intervention and mortality, an evidence-informed definition of delayed intervention for bleeding trauma patients at large has not been solidified. In addition, standardized research is needed to establish targets, which could reduce morbidity and mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review; Level IV.

Epinephrine in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Network Meta-analysis and Subgroup Analyses of Shockable and Nonshockable Rhythms.

BACKGROUND: Epinephrine is the most commonly used drug in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) resuscitation, but evidence supporting its efficacy is mixed. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the comparative efficacy and safety of standard dose epinephrine, high-dose epinephrine, epinephrine plus vasopressin, and placebo or no treatment in improving outcomes after OHCA? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we searched six databases from inception through June 2022 for randomized controlled trials evaluating epinephrine use during OHCA resuscitation. We performed frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and present ORs and 95% CIs. We used the the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to rate the certainty of evidence. Outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, survival to discharge, and survival with good functional outcome. RESULTS: We included 18 trials (21,594 patients). Compared with placebo or no treatment, high-dose epinephrine (OR, 4.27; 95% CI, 3.68-4.97), standard-dose epinephrine (OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 3.32-4.10), and epinephrine plus vasopressin (OR, 3.54; 95% CI, 2.94-4.26) all increased ROSC. High-dose epinephrine (OR, 3.53; 95% CI, 2.97-4.20), standard-dose epinephrine (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 2.66-3.38), and epinephrine plus vasopressin (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 2.27-3.44) all increased survival to hospital admission as compared with placebo or no treatment. However, none of these agents may increase survival to discharge or survival with good functional outcome as compared with placebo or no treatment. Compared with placebo or no treatment, standard-dose epinephrine improved survival to discharge among patients with nonshockable rhythm (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.21-3.63), but not in those with shockable rhythm (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.39-1.85). INTERPRETATION: Use of standard-dose epinephrine, high-dose epinephrine, and epinephrine plus vasopressin increases ROSC and survival to hospital admission, but may not improve survival to discharge or functional outcome. Standard-dose epinephrine improved survival to discharge among patients with nonshockable rhythm, but not those with shockable rhythm. TRIAL REGISTRY: Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/arxwq.

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.

Prognostic factors associated with mortality among patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) can be considered for patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who continue to deteriorate despite evidence-based therapies and lung-protective ventilation. The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization has emphasised the importance of patient selection; however, to better inform these decisions, a comprehensive and evidence-based understanding of the risk factors associated with poor outcomes is necessary. We aimed to summarise the association between pre-cannulation prognostic factors and risk of mortality in adult patients requiring venovenous ECMO for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE and Embase from Dec 1, 2019, to April 14, 2022, for randomised controlled trials and observational studies involving adult patients who required ECMO for COVID-19-associated ARDS and for whom pre-cannulation prognostic factors associated with in-hospital mortality were evaluated. We conducted separate meta-analyses of unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (uORs), adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs), and mean differences, and excluded studies if these data could not be extracted. We assessed the risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Our protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework registry, osf.io/6gcy2. FINDINGS: Our search identified 2888 studies, of which 42 observational cohort studies involving 17 449 patients were included. Factors that had moderate or high certainty of association with increased mortality included patient factors, such as older age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2·27 [95% CI 1·63-3·16]), male sex (unadjusted odds ratio [uOR] 1·34 [1·20-1·49]), and chronic lung disease (aHR 1·55 [1·20-2·00]); pre-cannulation disease factors, such as longer duration of symptoms (mean difference 1·51 days [95% CI 0·36-2·65]), longer duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (uOR 1·94 [1·40-2·67]), higher partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (mean difference 4·04 mm Hg [1·64-6·44]), and higher driving pressure (aHR 2·36 [1·40-3·97]); and centre factors, such as less previous experience with ECMO (aOR 2·27 [1·28-4·05]. INTERPRETATION: The prognostic factors identified highlight the importance of patient selection, the effect of injurious lung ventilation, and the potential opportunity for greater centralisation and collaboration in the use of ECMO for the treatment of COVID-19-associated ARDS. These factors should be carefully considered as part of a risk stratification framework when evaluating a patient for potential treatment with venovenous ECMO. FUNDING: None.

Inotropes, vasopressors, and mechanical circulatory support for treatment of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the relative efficacy of supportive therapies (inotropes, vasopressors, and mechanical circulatory support [MCS]) for adult patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. SOURCE: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis and searched six databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We evaluated inotropes, vasopressors, and MCS in separate networks. Two reviewers performed screening, full-text review, and extraction. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to rate the certainty in findings. The critical outcome of interest was 30-day all-cause mortality. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We included 17 RCTs. Among inotropes (seven RCTs, 1,145 patients), levosimendan probably reduces mortality compared with placebo (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.87; moderate certainty), but primarily in lower severity shock. Milrinone (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.19 to 1.39; low certainty) and dobutamine (OR, 0.67, 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.49; low certainty) may have no effect on mortality compared with placebo. With regard to MCS (eight RCTs, 856 patients), there may be no effect on mortality with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.28; low certainty) or percutaneous MCS (pMCS) (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.98; low certainty), compared with a strategy involving no MCS. Intra-aortic balloon pump use was associated with less major bleeding compared with pMCS. We found only two RCTs evaluating vasopressors, yielding insufficient data for meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review and network meta-analysis indicate that levosimendan reduces mortality compared with placebo among patients with low severity cardiogenic shock. Intra-aortic balloon pump and pMCS had no effect on mortality compared with a strategy of no MCS, but pMCS was associated with higher rates of major bleeding. STUDY REGISTRATION: Center for Open Science ( https://osf.io/ky2gr ); registered 10 November 2020.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Comparer l'efficacité relative des thérapies de soutien (inotropes, vasopresseurs et assistance circulatoire mécanique [ACM]) chez les patients adultes atteints d'un choc cardiogénique compliquant un infarctus aigu du myocarde. SOURCES: Nous avons réalisé une revue systématique et une méta-analyse en réseau et effectué des recherches dans six bases de données depuis leur création jusqu'à décembre 2021 pour en tirer les études randomisées contrôlées (ERC). Nous avons évalué les inotropes, les vasopresseurs et les ACM dans des réseaux distincts. Deux réviseurs ont effectué la recherche, l'évaluation du texte intégral et l'extraction. Nous avons utilisé le système de notation GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) pour évaluer la certitude des résultats. Le critère d'évaluation d'intérêt était la mortalité toutes causes confondues à 30 jours. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Nous avons inclus 17 ERC. Parmi les inotropes (sept ERC, 1145 patients), le lévosimendan a probablement réduit la mortalité par rapport au placebo (rapport de cotes [RC], 0,53; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,33 à 0,87; certitude modérée), mais principalement en cas de choc de sévérité moindre. La milrinone (RC, 0,52; IC 95 %, 0,19 à 1,39; certitude faible) et la dobutamine (RC, 0,67, IC 95 %, 0,30 à 1,49; certitude faible) pourraient n'avoir aucun effet sur la mortalité par rapport au placebo. En ce qui concerne l'ACM (huit ERC, 856 patients), il pourrait n'y avoir aucun effet sur la mortalité avec un ballon intra-aortique (IABP) (RC, 0,94; IC 95 %, 0,69 à 1,28; certitude faible) ou un ACM percutané (ACMp) (RC, 0,96; IC 95 %, 0,47 à 1,98; certitude faible), par rapport à une stratégie sans ACM. L'utilisation d'un ballon intra-aortique était associée à moins de saignements majeurs par rapport à une ACMp. Nous n'avons trouvé que deux ERC évaluant les vasopresseurs, ce qui n'a pas fourni suffisamment de données pour la méta-analyse. CONCLUSION: Les résultats de cette revue systématique et de la méta-analyse en réseau indiquent que le lévosimendan réduit la mortalité par rapport au placebo chez les patients présentant un choc cardiogénique de faible gravité. Le ballon intra-aortique et l'ACMp n'ont eu aucun effet sur la mortalité par rapport à une stratégie sans ACM, mais l'ACMp était associée à des taux plus élevés de saignements majeurs. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: Center for Open Science ( https://osf.io/ky2gr ); enregistrée le 10 novembre 2020.

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.

Accuracy of presenting symptoms, physical examination, and imaging for diagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is a life-threatening condition, and rapid diagnosis is necessary to facilitate early surgical intervention. We sought to evaluate the accuracy of presenting symptoms, physical examination signs, computed tomography with angiography (CTA), and point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) for diagnosis of rAAA. METHODS: We searched six databases from inception through April 2021. We included studies investigating the accuracy of any of the above tests for diagnosis of rAAA. The primary reference standard used in all studies was intraoperative diagnosis or death from rAAA. Because PoCUS cannot detect rupture, we secondarily assessed its accuracy for the diagnosis of AAA, using the reference standard of intraoperative or CTA diagnosis. We used GRADE to assess certainty in estimates. RESULTS: We included 20 studies (2,077 patients), with 11 of these evaluating signs and symptoms, seven evaluating CTA, and five evaluating PoCUS. Pooled sensitivities of abdominal pain, back pain, and syncope for rAAA were 61.7%, 53.6%, and 27.8%, respectively (low certainty). Pooled sensitivity of hypotension and pulsatile abdominal mass were 30.9% and 47.1%, respectively (low certainty). CTA had a sensitivity of 91.4% and specificity of 93.6% for diagnosis of rAAA (moderate certainty). In our secondary analysis, PoCUS had a sensitivity of 97.8% and specificity of 97.0% for diagnosing AAA in patients suspected of having rAAA (moderate certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Classic clinical symptoms associated with rAAA have poor sensitivity, and their absence does not rule out the condition. CTA has reasonable accuracy, but misses some cases of rAAA. PoCUS is a valuable tool that can help guide the need for urgent transfer to a vascular center in patients suspected of having rAAA.

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.