Objective: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively estimate the incidence and mortality of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in overall and subgroups of patients with burns.Data sources: Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL databases, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure database were searched until September 1, 2021.Study selection: Articles that report study data on incidence or mortality of ARDS in patients with burns were selected.Data extraction: Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality. We performed a meta-analysis of the incidence and mortality of ARDS in patients with burns using a random effects model, which made subgroup analysis according to the study type, inclusion (mechanical ventilation, minimal burn surface), definitions of ARDS, geographic location, mean age, burn severity, and inhalation injury. Primary outcomes were the incidence and mortality of burns patients with ARDS, and secondary outcomes were incidence for different subgroups.Data synthesis: Pooled weighted estimate of the incidence and mortality of ARDS in patients with burns was 0.24 [95% confidence interval (CI)0.2–0.28] and 0.31 [95% CI 0.18−0.44]. Incidences of ARDS were obviously higher in patients on mechanical ventilation (incidence = 0.37), diagnosed by Berlin definition (incidence = 0.35), and with over 50% inhalation injury proportion (incidence = 0.41) than in overall patients with burns. Patients with burns who came from western countries and with inhalation injury have a significantly higher incidence of ARDS compared with those who came from Asian/African countries (0.28 vs. 0.25) and without inhalation injury (0.41 vs. 0.24).Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the incidence of ARDS in patients with burns is 24% and that mortality is as high as 31%. The incidence rates are related to mechanical ventilation, location, and inhalation injury. The patients with burns from western countries and with inhalation injury have a significantly higher incidence than patients from Asian/African countries and without inhalation injury.Systematic Review Registration: identifier: CRD42021144888.
Background The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of thiamine and vitamin C with or without hydrocortisone coadministration on the treatment of sepsis and septic shock. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that made a comparative study between the combination therapy of vitamin C and thiamine with or without hydrocortisone and the administration of placebo in patients with sepsis or septic shock. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Both short-term mortality and change in the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score from baseline (delta SOFA) were set as the primary outcomes. Secondary endpoints included intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, new onset of acute kidney injury, total adverse events, ICU and hospital length of stay, duration of vasopressor usage and ventilator-free days. Meanwhile, trial sequential analysis was conducted for primary outcomes. Results Eight RCTs with 1428 patients were included in the current study. The results showed no significant reduction of short-term mortality in sepsis and septic shock patients who received combination therapy of vitamin C and thiamine with or without hydrocortisone compared to those with placebo {risk ratio (RR), 1.02 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.87 to 1.20], p = 0.81, I2 = 0%; risk difference (RD), 0 [95% CI, −0.04 to 0.05]}. Nevertheless, the combination therapy was associated with significant reduction in SOFA score [mean difference (MD), −0.63, (95% CI, −0.96 to −0.29, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%] and vasopressors duration (MD, −22.11 [95% CI, −30.46 to −13.77], p < 0.001, I2 = 6%). Additionally, there were no statistical differences in the pooled estimate for other outcomes. Conclusions In the current meta-analysis, the combination therapy of vitamin C and thiamine, with or without hydrocortisone had no impact on short-term mortality when compared with placebo, but was associated with significant reduction in SOFA score among patients with sepsis and septic shock.
Background: A large number of studies have been conducted to determine whether there is an association between preadmission statin use and improvement in outcomes following critical illness, but the conclusions are quite inconsistent. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to include the present relevant PSM researches to examine the association of preadmission use of statins with the mortality of critically ill patients.Methods: The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase electronic databases, and printed resources were searched for English articles published before March 6, 2020 on the association between preadmission statin use and mortality in critically ill patients. The included articles were analyzed in RevMan 5.3. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to conduct quality evaluation, and random/fixed effects modeling was used to calculate the pooled ORs and 95% CIs. We also conducted subgroup analysis by outcome indicators (30-, 90-day, hospital mortality).Results: All six PSM observational studies were assessed as having a low risk of bias according to the NOS. For primary outcome—overall mortality, the pooled OR (preadmission statins use vs. no use) across the six included studies was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.76–0.97; P = 0.02). For secondary outcome—use of mechanical ventilation, the pooled OR was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91–0.97; P = 0.0005). The corresponding pooled ORs were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.43–1.05; P = 0.08), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.83–1.01; P = 0.07), and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83–0.89; P < 0.00001) for 30-, 90-day, and hospital mortality, respectively.Conclusions: Preadmission statin use is associated with beneficial outcomes in critical ill patients, indicating a lower short-term mortality, less use of mechanical ventilation, and an improvement in hospital survival. Further high-quality original studies or more scientific methods are needed to draw a definitive conclusion.
Background Scar comorbidities seriously affect the physical and mental health of patients, but few studies have reported the exact epidemiological characteristics of scar comorbidities in China. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of scar comorbidities in China. Methods The data of 177,586 scar cases between 2013 and 2018 were obtained from the Hospital Quality Monitoring System based on the 10th edition of the International Classification of Diseases coding system. The total distribution of scar comorbidities and their relationship with age, aetiology and body regions were analysed. Results Six comorbidities (contracture, malformation, ocular complications, adhesion, infection and others) were the main focus. In general, male patients outnumbered females and urban areas outnumbered rural areas. The proportion of contractures was the highest at 59,028 (33.24%). Students, workers and farmers made up the majority of the occupation. Han Chinese accounted for the majority of the ethnic. The highest proportion of scar contracture occurred at 1–1.9 years of age (58.97%), after which a significant downward trend was observed. However, starting from 50 years of age, ocular complications increased gradually and significantly, eventually reaching a peak of 34.49% in those aged >80 years. Scar contracture was the most common comorbidity according to aetiology, and the highest proportion was observed in patients who were scalded (29.33%). Contractures were also the most frequent comorbidity in hands (10.30%), lower limbs (6.97%), feet (6.80%) and upper limbs (6.02%). The mean and median hospitalization durations were 12.85 and 8 days, respectively. Conclusions Contractures were the most common comorbidities, and different comorbidities tended to occur at different ages and with different causative factors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.