Coupled plasma filtration adsorption for the treatment of sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:2
|
作者
Li, Yuting [1 ]
Li, Hongxiang [1 ]
Guo, Jianxing [1 ]
Wang, Youquan [1 ]
Zhang, Dong [1 ]
机构
[1] First Hosp Jilin Univ, Dept Intens Care Unit, Changchun 130021, Jilin, Peoples R China
关键词
Coupled plasma filtration adsorption; Sepsis; Septic shock; Mortality; Meta-analysis; THERAPY; PLASMAFILTRATION; MANAGEMENT; MORTALITY; REMOVAL;
D O I
10.1186/s12879-022-07689-5
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Key messages The treatment of CPFA failed to decrease all-cause mortality of sepsis or septic shock patients. Potential drawbacks of this technique are the unexpected elimination of antibiotics, worsened procoagulant state and oxidative stress, expensive cost. Further rigorous investigation defining both the efficacy and safety of this otherwise promising hemopurification method on sepsis or septic shock is necessary. Background The effect of coupled plasma filtration adsorption (CPFA) for the treatment of sepsis or septic shock is controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of CPFA on all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock. Methods We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies from inception to the 1st of May 2022. We included studies involving patients (> 14 years) with sepsis or septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of all-cause mortality (hospital mortality, 28-day mortality or 30-day mortality). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Six studies including 537 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that the all-cause mortality was about 54.2% (119/243 in the CPFA group and 172/294 in the control group). There was no statistically significant difference in the all-cause mortality between two groups (odds ratio [OR] = 0.75; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.06; P = 0.11; Chi(2) = 14.04; I-2 = 64%). Conclusions The treatment of CPFA failed to decrease all-cause mortality of sepsis or septic shock patients. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the ability of this therapy to improve clinical outcomes are still required to confirm these results.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] HYDROCORTISONE COMBINED WITH VITAMIN C AND THIAMINE IN THE TREATMENT OF SEPSIS/SEPTIC SHOCK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW WITH META-ANALYSIS AND TRIAL SEQUENTIAL ANALYSIS
    Lu, Difan
    Mao, Wenchao
    CLINICAL AND INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2023, 46 (01): : E36 - E49
  • [42] EFFECT OF ASCORBIC ACID, CORTICOSTEROIDS, AND THIAMINE (HAT THERAPY) FOR THE TREATMENT OF SEPSIS OR SEPTIC SHOCK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
    SAHEBNASAGH, A.
    MOGHADAM, Z. B. O. O. S. T. A. N. I.
    SALEHI-ABARGOUEI, A.
    SAGHAF, F., I
    CHEST, 2022, 161 (06) : 213A - 213A
  • [43] Polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock in critically ill adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Laupland, Kevin B.
    Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.
    Delaney, Anthony
    CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2007, 35 (12) : 2686 - 2692
  • [44] Hydrocortisone with fludrocortisone for septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Yamamoto, Ryo
    Nahara, Isao
    Toyosaki, Mitsunobu
    Fukuda, Tatsuma
    Masuda, Yoshiki
    Fujishima, Seitaro
    ACUTE MEDICINE & SURGERY, 2020, 7 (01):
  • [45] Methylene Blue in Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Fernando, Shannon M.
    Tran, Alexandre
    Soliman, Karim
    Flynn, Barbara
    Oommen, Thomas
    Wenzhe, Li
    Adhikari, Neill K. J.
    Kanji, Salmaan
    Seely, Andrew J. E.
    Fox-Robichaud, Alison E.
    Wax, Randy S.
    Cook, Deborah J.
    Lamontagne, Francois
    Rochwerg, Bram
    CRITICAL CARE EXPLORATIONS, 2024, 6 (07) : e1110
  • [46] Corticosteroids in septic shock: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Ben Gibbison
    José A. López-López
    Julian P. T. Higgins
    Tom Miller
    Gianni D. Angelini
    Stafford L. Lightman
    Djillali Annane
    Critical Care, 21
  • [47] Vasopressors in septic shock: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Zhou, Feihu
    Mao, Zhi
    Zeng, Xiantao
    Kang, Hongjun
    Liu, Hui
    Pan, Liang
    Hou, Peter C.
    THERAPEUTICS AND CLINICAL RISK MANAGEMENT, 2015, 11 : 1047 - 1059
  • [48] Corticosteroids in septic shock: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Gibbison, Ben
    Lopez-Lopez, Jose A.
    Higgins, Julian P. T.
    Miller, Tom
    Angelini, Gianni D.
    Lightman, Stafford L.
    Annane, Djillali
    CRITICAL CARE, 2017, 21
  • [49] Outcome of Immediate Versus Early Antibiotics in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Rothrock, Steven G.
    Cassidy, David D.
    Barneck, Mitchell
    Schinkel, Michiel
    Guetschow, Brian
    Myburgh, Christiaan
    Nguyen, Linh
    Earwood, Ryan
    Nanayakkara, Prabath W. B.
    Panday, Rishi S. Nannan
    Briscoe, Joshua G.
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2020, 76 (04) : 427 - 441
  • [50] Restrictive Versus Liberal Fluid Regimen in Refractory Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Abdelbaky, Ahmed M.
    Elmasry, Wael G.
    Awad, Ahmed H.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (10)