-
Meta Analysis
Efficacy and safety of blood purification in the treatment of deep burns: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Gaofei Zhang, Wenjun Liu, Jiamei Li, Di Wang, Jianxing Duan, and Hanxiao Luo.
- Department of Burn and Injury.
- Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Feb 5; 100 (5): e23968e23968.
IntroductionThis meta-analysis aimed to systematically review and evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies examining the efficacy and safety of blood purification in the treatment of patients with deep burns.MethodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases and relevant references were systematically searched for RCTs and cohort studies published until the end of September 2020 to investigate the potential of blood purification in improving the prognosis of severely burned patients. The primary outcome of this systematic review was overall patient mortality; secondary outcomes included the incidence of sepsis and infection prevention (vital signs and routine blood tests).ResultsA total of 6 RCTs and 1 cohort study were included, with a total of 538 burn patients (274 patients who received blood purification and 264 control patients). Compared with patients who received conventional treatment, those treated with blood purification displayed significant 2-day reduction in mortality and sepsis with relative risks of 0.62 and 0.41, respectively (95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.74-0.82 and 0.25-0.67, respectively; P < .05). In terms of vital signs and blood biochemistry, the respiratory rates and blood urea nitrogen levels of patients in the blood purification group 3 days post-treatment were significantly higher than those in the control group (randomized standard deviations (SMDs), 0.78 and 0.77, respectively; 95% CIs, 0.33-1.23 and 1.22-0.31, respectively; P < .05). However, there were no significant differences between groups on day 3 with regard to temperature (P = .32), heart rate (P = .26), white blood cell count (P = .54), or neutrophil count (P = .74), potentially owing to the small sample size or the relatively short intervention time. Heterogeneous differences existed between the groups with respect to blood urea nitrogen (SMD = -1.22; 95% CI, -2.16 to -0.40; P < .00001) and Cr (SMD = -3.13; 95% CI, -4.92 to -1.33; P < .00001) on day 7. No systematic adverse events occurred.ConclusionsBlood purification treatment for deep burn patients can significantly reduce the mortality rate and the incidence of complications.Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.