Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Positive single-center randomized trials and subsequent multicenter randomized trials in critically ill patients: a systematic review.
Kotani, Yuki; Turi, Stefano; Ortalda, Alessandro; Baiardo Redaelli, Martina; Marchetti, Cristiano; Landoni, Giovanni; Bellomo, Rinaldo.
Afiliação
  • Kotani Y; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
  • Turi S; School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 58, 20132, Milan, Italy.
  • Ortalda A; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, Chiba, 296-8602, Japan.
  • Baiardo Redaelli M; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
  • Marchetti C; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
  • Landoni G; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
  • Bellomo R; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
Crit Care ; 27(1): 465, 2023 11 28.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38017475
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

It is unclear how often survival benefits observed in single-center randomized controlled trials (sRCTs) involving critically ill patients are confirmed by subsequent multicenter randomized controlled trials (mRCTs). We aimed to perform a systemic literature review of sRCTs with a statistically significant mortality reduction and to evaluate whether subsequent mRCTs confirmed such reduction.

METHODS:

We searched PubMed for sRCTs published in the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, or Lancet, from inception until December 31, 2016. We selected studies reporting a statistically significant mortality decrease using any intervention (drug, technique, or strategy) in adult critically ill patients. We then searched for subsequent mRCTs addressing the same research question tested by the sRCT. We compared the concordance of results between sRCTs and mRCTs when any mRCT was available. We registered this systematic review in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023455362).

RESULTS:

We identified 19 sRCTs reporting a significant mortality reduction in adult critically ill patients. For 16 sRCTs, we identified at least one subsequent mRCT (24 trials in total), while the interventions from three sRCTs have not yet been addressed in a subsequent mRCT. Only one out of 16 sRCTs (6%) was followed by a mRCT replicating a significant mortality reduction; 14 (88%) were followed by mRCTs with no mortality difference. The positive finding of one sRCT (6%) on intensive glycemic control was contradicted by a subsequent mRCT showing a significant mortality increase. Of the 14 sRCTs referenced at least once in international guidelines, six (43%) have since been either removed or suggested against in the most recent versions of relevant guidelines.

CONCLUSION:

Mortality reduction shown by sRCTs is typically not replicated by mRCTs. The findings of sRCTs should be considered hypothesis-generating and should not contribute to guidelines.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Estado Terminal Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Estado Terminal Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article