SynthesisScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2016
Early goal-directed resuscitation for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of goal-directed fluid therapy on renal function in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Renal failure · 2022Pooled it
- Early goal-directed and lactate-guided therapy in adult patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of translational medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Hypoalbuminemia, Low Base Excess Values, and Tachypnea Predict 28-Day Mortality in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Patients in the Emergency Department.Yonsei medical journal · 2016Trial
- Article
- The Clinical Impact of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) Test in Hospitalized Patients with Suspected Sepsis: A Multicenter Prospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Fluid overload in patients with septic shock and lactate clearance as a therapeutic goal: a retrospective cohort study.Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva · 2020Article
- Clinical Approach to the Patient in Critical State Following Immunotherapy and/or Stem Cell Transplantation: Guideline for the On-Call Physician.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- Impact of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in the Emergency Department on Care Processes and Outcomes in Critically Ill Nontraumatic Patients.Critical care explorations · 2019Article
- 2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2018Review
- Significance of hydrogen sulfide in sepsis-induced myocardial injury in rats.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2017Article
- Early management of sepsis with emphasis on early goal directed therapy: AME evidence series 002.Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to explore whether early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) was associated with a lower mortality rate in comparison to usual care in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library and a Chinese database (SinoMed) were searched systematically to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard EGDT with usual care in resuscitation of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock and the search time could date back to the publication of the study by Rivers in 2001. The study selection, data extraction and methodological evaluation were performed by two investigators independently. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The present meta-analysis had been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015017667).
resultsOur meta-analysis identified 6 studies and enrolling 4336 patients. There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups, and the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.83 (95 % confident interval, CI, 0.64-1.08) with significant heterogeneity (p = 0.02, I(2) = 64%). However, the pooled OR of 3 multicenter RCTs was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.89-1.21) with no heterogeneity (p = 0.78, I(2) = 0%). The effects of EGDT on length of stay in the emergency department and intensive care unit were uncertain, and there was no effect of EGDT on hospital length of stay. There were no differences of mechanical ventilation rate and renal replacement therapy rate between the two groups, and patients in the EGDT group were more admitted in ICU than patients in the control group. During the early 6-h intervention period, patients in the EGDT group received more intravenous fluids, had a higher vasopressor usage rate, higher dobutamine usage rate and higher blood transfusion rate, than patients in the control group. Finally, there was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups, and the pooled OR was 1.06 (95%CI 0.80-1.39) with moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 62%, p = 0.07). DISCUSSION: Our meta-analysis showed that the application of EGDT was not associated with lower mortality rate currently. However it does not mean that it is useless of EGDT in patients with sever sepsis and septic shock. On the contrary, there was no difference in mortality rate between the two groups may be due to the improvement of therapeutic strategies in these patients. And the results may be related to the different compliance rate of EGDT resuscitation bundle.
conclusionsThe current evidence does not support the significant advantage of Early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) in the resuscitation of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.