Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21211010›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2011

An updated study-level meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on proning in ARDS and acute lung injury.

Fekri Abroug, Lamia Ouanes-Besbes, Fahmi Dachraoui, Islem Ouanes, Laurent Brochard

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Prone position for acute respiratory failure in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Breathing face down.British journal of anaesthesia · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Fekri AbrougICU CHU F, Bourguiba, 1st June 1955 Str, University of Monastir, Monastir 5000, Tunisia. f.abroug@rns.tn
Lamia Ouanes-Besbes
Fahmi Dachraoui
Islem Ouanes
Laurent Brochard

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn patients with acute lung injury (ALI) and/or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed a consistent trend of mortality reduction with prone ventilation. We updated a meta-analysis on this topic.

methodsRCTs that compared ventilation of adult patients with ALI/ARDS in prone versus supine position were included in this study-level meta-analysis. Analysis was made by a random-effects model. The effect size on intensive care unit (ICU) mortality was computed in the overall included studies and in two subgroups of studies: those that included all ALI or hypoxemic patients, and those that restricted inclusion to only ARDS patients. A relationship between studies' effect size and daily prone duration was sought with meta-regression. We also computed the effects of prone positioning on major adverse airway complications.

resultsSeven RCTs (including 1,675 adult patients, of whom 862 were ventilated in the prone position) were included. The four most recent trials included only ARDS patients, and also applied the longest proning durations and used lung-protective ventilation. The effects of prone positioning differed according to the type of study. Overall, prone ventilation did not reduce ICU mortality (odds ratio = 0.91, 95% confidence interval = 0.75 to 1.2; P = 0.39), but it significantly reduced the ICU mortality in the four recent studies that enrolled only patients with ARDS (odds ratio = 0.71; 95% confidence interval = 0.5 to 0.99; P = 0.048; number needed to treat = 11). Meta-regression on all studies disclosed only a trend to explain effect variation by prone duration (P = 0.06). Prone positioning was not associated with a statistical increase in major airway complications.

conclusionsLong duration of ventilation in prone position significantly reduces ICU mortality when only ARDS patients are considered.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityAcute Lung InjuryHumansIntensive Care UnitsPatient PositioningProne PositionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRespiration, ArtificialRespiratory Distress SyndromeRisk FactorsSupine PositionTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID21211010
PMCPMC3222033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.