-
Critical care medicine · Apr 2017
Review Meta AnalysisEarly Goal-Directed Therapy for Sepsis: A Novel Solution for Discordant Survival Outcomes in Clinical Trials.
- Andre C Kalil, Daniel W Johnson, Steven J Lisco, and Junfeng Sun.
- 1Infectious Disease Division, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE.2Critical Care Division, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE.3Critical Care Department, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
- Crit. Care Med. 2017 Apr 1; 45 (4): 607-614.
ObjectivesEarly goal-directed therapy has shown discordant survival outcomes in sepsis studies. We aim to find the reasons for this discordance.DesignRandom-effects and Bayesian hierarchical analyses.SettingStudies that evaluated early goal-directed therapy.SubjectsPatients with severe sepsis and/or septic shock.InterventionsEarly goal-directed therapy.Measurements And Main ResultsA total of 19,998 patients were included in the main analysis: 31 observational (n = 15,656) and six randomized (n = 4,342) studies. The analysis from 37 studies showed that early goal-directed therapy was associated with a 23% reduction in the risk of death: relative risk = 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.83); p value of less than 0.0001. Mortality reduction was seen with observational studies: relative risk = 0.73 (0.67-0.80); p value of less than 0.0001 but not with randomized studies: relative risk = 0.92 (0.78-1.07); p = 0.268. Meta-regression analysis showed lower risk of death in observational compared with randomized studies: relative risk = 0.81 (0.68-0.95); p = 0.01. Differences in age, country, hospital location, era, systolic pressure, mean arterial pressure, lactate, bundle compliance, amount of fluid administered, and hemodynamic goal achievements were not associated with survival differences between studies. Factors associated with mortality differences between early goal-directed therapy and control included Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (relative risk = 1.05 [1.02-1.09]; p = 0.003), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (relative risk = 1.09 [1.00-1.18]; p = 0.04), presence of shock (relative risk = 1.007 [1.002-1.013]; p = 0.006), time-to-first antibiotic (relative risk = 1.22 [1.09-1.36]; p = 0.0006), antibiotic administration within 6 hours (relative risk = 0.20 [0.09-0.45]; p = 0.0001), 4 hours (relative risk = 0.16 [0.06-0.39]; p = 0.0001), and 3 hours (relative risk = 0.09 [0.03-0.27]; p < 0.0001). The only factors that explained mortality differences between randomized and observational studies were time-to-first antibiotic (R = 87%), antibiotic administration within 6 hours (R = 94%), 4 hours (R = 99%), 3 hours (R = 99%), and appropriate antibiotic use (R = 96%).ConclusionsSurvival discordance was not associated with differences in early goal-directed therapy bundle compliance or hemodynamic goal achievement. Our results suggest that it was associated with faster and more appropriate antibiotic co-intervention in the early goal-directed therapy arm compared with controls in the observational studies but not in the randomized trials. Early goal-directed therapy was associated with increased mortality in patients with high-disease severity.
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.
.