The effect of early vasopressin use on patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis
The American journal of emergency medicine. 2021;48:203-208
BACKGROUND The effect of early vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock is uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of early start of vasopressin support within 6 h after the diagnosis on clinical outcomes in septic shock patients. METHODS We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies from inception to the 1st of February 2021. We included studies involving adult patients (> 16 years)with septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality and in the experimental group patients in the studies receiving vasopressin infusion within 6 h after diagnosis of septic shock and in the control group patients in the studies receiving no vasopressin infusion or vasopressin infusion 6 h after diagnosis of septic shock, clearly comparing with clinically relevant secondary outcomes(use of renal replacement therapy(RRT),new onset arrhythmias, ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS Five studies including 788 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that short-term mortality between the two groups was no difference (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.48; P = 0.6; χ2 = 0.83; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes demonstrated that the use of RRT was less in the experimental group than that of the control group (OR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.88; P = 0.007; χ2 = 3.15; I2 = 36%).The new onset arrhythmias between the two groups was no statistically significant difference (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.1; P = 0.10; χ2 = 4.7; I2 = 36%). There was no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay(mean difference = 0.16; 95% CI, - 0.91 to 1.22; P = 0.77; χ2 = 6.08; I2 = 34%) and length of hospitalization (mean difference = -2.41; 95% CI, -6.61 to 1.78; P = 0.26; χ2 = 8.57; I2 = 53%) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Early initiation of vasopressin in patients within 6 h of septic shock onset was not associated with decreased short-term mortality, new onset arrhythmias, shorter ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization, but can reduce the use of RRT. Further large-scale RCTs are still needed to evaluate the benefit of starting vasopressin in the early phase of septic shock.
Economic evaluation alongside the Premature Infants in Need of Transfusion randomised controlled trial
Archives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & Neonatal Edition. 2012;97((2):):F93-8.
BACKGROUND The Premature Infants in Need of Transfusion (PINT) Outcome Study showed no significant difference in the primary outcome of death or neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) in extremely low birthweight (ELBW) infants. However, a post-hoc analysis expanding the definition of NDI to include borderline intellectual functioning (Mental Development Index (MDI) <85) found an improvement in outcomes in the group maintained at higher haemoglobin levels. OBJECTIVE To determine the cost effectiveness of more frequent red blood cell transfusions (high-Hb threshold) compared with less frequent transfusions (low-Hb threshold) in ELBW infants. DESIGN/METHODS The authors performed an economic evaluation using patient-level data collected during the PINT randomised trial. The authors measured comprehensive costs from a third-party payer's perspective over a time horizon from birth through 18-21 months corrected age. RESULTS The average total cost in the high-Hb threshold group was CAN$149 767 compared with CAN$150 227 in the low-Hb threshold group (difference of CAN$460, p=0.96). Cost-effectiveness analysis estimated savings of CAN$6879 for every additional infant surviving without severe NDI. There was a 48% chance that the high-Hb threshold reduced costs while improving outcome and a 90% chance that it would be cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAN$250 000 per additional survivor without severe NDI. Post-hoc analysis defining cognitive delay as MDI score <85, instead of <70, revealed savings in the high-Hb threshold group of CAN$4457 per additional survivor without NDI. Results were robust to deterministic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION A high-Hb threshold for transfusion, as measured in ELBW PINT study infants through 18 months corrected gestational age, may be an economically appealing intervention. The estimates were associated with moderate statistical uncertainty that should be targeted in larger, future studies.