scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin in patients with sepsis‐associated coagulopathy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 1618-1625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Valeriani ◽  
Alessandro Squizzato ◽  
Andrea Gallo ◽  
Ettore Porreca ◽  
Jean‐Louis Vincent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Soluble Thrombomodulin ◽  
Recombinant Human Soluble Thrombomodulin

scholarly journals Recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin in severe sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 508-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Yamakawa ◽  
M. Aihara ◽  
H. Ogura ◽  
H. Yuhara ◽  
T. Hamasaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Soluble Thrombomodulin ◽  
Recombinant Human Soluble Thrombomodulin

Recombinant Human Soluble Thrombomodulin in Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 119 (01) ◽  
pp. 056-065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuma Yamakawa ◽  
Shuhei Murao ◽  
Morio Aihara
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sequential Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Trial Sequential Analysis ◽  
Soluble Thrombomodulin ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Recombinant Human Soluble Thrombomodulin

Background Clinical effectiveness of recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin (rhTM) in sepsis or sepsis-induced coagulopathy remains a matter of dispute. Recently, the Sepsis Coagulopathy Asahi Recombinant LE Thrombomodulin (SCARLET) trial, the latest multinational multi-centre phase III randomized controlled trial, was completed. Objective This article assesses the benefits and harms of rhTM therapy in sepsis-induced coagulopathy by updating our previous systematic review. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of rhTM therapy for sepsis-induced coagulopathy in randomized controlled trials. All-cause 28-day mortality as efficacy and serious bleeding complications as the adverse effect were measured as primary outcomes. We assessed the certainty of a body of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results We analysed five trials enrolling 1,762 patients. Approximately 13% reduction in the risk of mortality was observed in the rhTM group, but the difference was not significant (relative risk, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–1.03; p = 0.10; I 2 = 0%). Risk of serious bleeding complications did not increase with rhTM administration. We judged the certainty of evidence as moderate for mortality and low for serious bleeding. Trial sequential analysis indicated that only 42.0% of the required information size is actually available at this stage to reject or accept low risk-of-bias trials examining the anticipated effect for all-cause mortality. Conclusion Even in this updated review including the latest SCARLET trial, we currently cannot make any declarative judgments about the beneficial effects of rhTM in sepsis-induced coagulopathy, although some favourable effects were suggested.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document