Oncotarget

Clinical Research Papers:

Early outcome of early-goal directed therapy for patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Xiaofan Chen, Weifeng Zhu, Jing Tan, Heyun Nie, Liangming Liu, Dongmei Yan, Xu Zhou and Xin Sun _

PDF  |  HTML  |  Supplementary Files  |  How to cite  |  Order a Reprint

Oncotarget. 2017; 8:27510-27519. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.15550

Metrics: PDF 922 views  |   HTML 1624 views  |   ?  


Abstract

Xiaofan Chen1,2, Weifeng Zhu2, Jing Tan1, Heyun Nie2, Liangming Liu3, Dongmei Yan2, Xu Zhou2 and Xin Sun1

1 Chinese Cochrane Centre, Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuang, China

2 Evidence-Based Medicine Research Centre, Jiangxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China

3 State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Second Department of Research Institute of Surgery, Daping Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China

Correspondence to:

Xin Sun, email:

Liangming Liu, email:

Keywords: early-goal directed therapy; sepsis; septic shock; randomized controlled trial; meta-analysis

Received: January 21, 2017 Accepted: February 13, 2017 Published: February 20, 2017

Abstract

Various trials and meta-analyses have reported conflicting results concerning the application of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) for sepsis and septic shock. The aim of this study was to update the evidence by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Multiple databases were searched from initial through August, 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which investigated the associations between the use of EGDT and mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model and heterogeneity was examined through subgroup analyses. The primary outcome of interest was patient all-cause mortality including hospital or ICU mortality. Seventeen RCTs including 6207 participants with 3234 in the EGDT group and 2973 in the control group were eligible for this study. Meta-analysis showed that EGDT did not significantly reduce hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.02) compared with control group for patients with sepsis or septic shock. The findings of subgroup analyses stratified by study region, number of research center, year of enrollment, clinical setting, sample size, timing of EGDT almost remained constant with that of the primary analysis. Our findings provide evidence that EGDT offers neutral survival effects for patients with sepsis or septic shock. Further meta-analyses based on larger well-designed RCTs or individual patient data meta-analysis are required to explore the survival benefits of EDGT in patients with sepsis or septic shock.


Creative Commons License All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PII: 15550