scholarly journals The effect of prone positioning on mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Critical Care ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. R109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shu Hu ◽  
Hong He ◽  
Chun Pan ◽  
Ai Liu ◽  
Song Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Prone Positioning ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Prone versus Supine Position Ventilation in Adult Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Zanfeng Cao ◽  
Zhanzheng Yang ◽  
Zijing Liang ◽  
Qingyan Cen ◽  
Zuopeng Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Prone Position ◽  
Supine Position ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of prone versus supine position ventilation for adult acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched from their inception up to September 2020. The relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were employed to calculate pooled outcomes using the random-effects models. Twelve randomized controlled trials that had recruited a total of 2264 adults with ARDS were selected for the final meta-analysis. The risk of mortality in patients who received prone position ventilation was 13% lower than for those who received supine ventilation, but this effect was not statistically significant (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.75–1.00; P  = 0.055). There were no significant differences between prone and supine position ventilation on the duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD: −0.22; P  = 0.883) or ICU stays (WMD: –0.39; P  = 0.738). The pooled RRs indicate that patients who received prone position ventilation had increased incidence of pressure scores (RR: 1.23; P  = 0.003), displacement of a thoracotomy tube (RR: 3.14; P  = 0.047), and endotracheal tube obstruction (RR: 2.45; P  = 0.001). The results indicated that prone positioning during ventilation might have a beneficial effect on mortality, though incidence of several adverse events was significantly increased for these patients.

scholarly journals Ulinastatin treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome in China: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiangyun Zhang ◽  
Zhaozhong Zhu ◽  
Weijie Jiao ◽  
Wei Liu ◽  
Fang Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oxygenation Index ◽  
Inflammatory Factors ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background Epidemiologic studies have shown inconsistent conclusions about the effect of ulinastain treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is necessary to perform a meta-analysis of ulinastatin’s randomized controlled trials (RCTS) to evaluate its efficacy for treating ARDS. Methods We searched the published RCTs of ulinastatin treatment for ARDS from nine databases (the latest search on April 30th, 2017). Two authors independently screened citations and extracted data. The meta-analysis was performed using Rev. Man 5.3 software. Results A total of 33 RCTs involving 2344 patients satisfied the selection criteria and were included in meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that, compared to conventional therapy, ulinastatin has a significant benefit for ARDS patients by reducing mortality (RR = 0.51, 95% CI:0.43~0.61) and ventilator associated pneumonia rate (RR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.36~0.69), and shortening duration of mechanical ventilation (SMD = -1.29, 95% CI: -1.76~-0.83), length of intensive care unit stay (SMD = -1.38, 95% CI: -1.95~-0.80), and hospital stay (SMD = -1.70, 95% CI:-2.63~−0.77). Meanwhile, ulinastatin significantly increased the patients’ oxygenation index (SMD = 2.04, 95% CI: 1.62~2.46) and decreased respiratory rate (SMD = -1.08, 95% CI: -1.29~-0.88) and serum inflammatory factors (tumor necrosis factor-α: SMD = -3.06, 95% CI:-4.34~-1.78; interleukin-1β: SMD = -3.49, 95% CI: -4.64~-2.34; interleukin-6: SMD = -2.39, 95% CI: -3.34~-1.45; interleukin-8: SMD = -2.43, 95% CI: -3.86~-1.00). Conclusions Ulinastatin seemly showed a beneficial effect for ARDS patients treatment and larger sample sized RCTs are needed to confirm our findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document