Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27991651›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016

Oxygen therapy for acute myocardial infarction.

Juan B Cabello, Amanda Burls, José I Emparanza, Susan E Bayliss, Tom Quinn

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
23.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 222 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. [Oxygen in the acute care of adults : Short version of the German S3 guideline].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. [Oxygen in emergency treatment of adults].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Juan B CabelloDepartment of Cardiology & CASP Spain, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Pintor Baeza 12, Alicante, Alicante, Spain, 03010.
Amanda BurlsSchool of Health Sciences, City University London, Myddleton Street, London, UK, EC1V 0HB.
José I EmparanzaUnidad de Epidemiología Clínica. CASPe. CIBERESP, Hospital Universitario Donostia, Paseo del Doctor Begiristain, 107-115, San Sebastián, Spain, 20014.
Susan E BaylissPublic Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK, B15 2TT.
Tom QuinnFaculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Kingston University and St George's University of London, Grosvenor Wing, Cranmer Terrace, London, UK, SW17 0RE.
Biogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESCity, University of London · GBHospital General Universitario de Alicante Doctor Balmis · ESKingston University · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOxygen (O

objectivesTo assess the effects of routine use of inhaled oxygen for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). SEARCH

methodsWe searched the following bibliographic databases on 6 June 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO) and Web of Science (Thomson Reuters). LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature) was last searched in September 2016. We also contacted experts to identify eligible studies. We applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in people with suspected or proven AMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI) within 24 hours after onset, in which the intervention was inhaled oxygen (at normal pressure) compared to air, regardless of co-therapies provided to participants in both arms of the trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of identified studies to see if they met the inclusion criteria and independently undertook the data extraction. We assessed the quality of studies and the risk of bias according to guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The primary outcome was death. The measure of effect used was the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of the evidence and the GRADE profiler (GRADEpro) to import data from Review Manager 5 and create 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN

resultsThe updated search yielded one new trial, for a total of five included studies involving 1173 participants, 32 of whom died. The pooled risk ratio (RR) of all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat analysis was 0.99 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.95; 4 studies, N = 1123; I AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support the routine use of inhaled oxygen in people with AMI, and we cannot rule out a harmful effect. Given the uncertainty surrounding the effect of oxygen therapy on all-cause mortality and on other outcomes critical for clinical decision, well-conducted, high quality randomised controlled trials are urgently required to inform guidelines in order to give definitive recommendations about the routine use of oxygen in AMI.

Indexed as

Oxygen Inhalation TherapyAirAnalgesicsCause of DeathHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisMyocardial InfarctionPain MeasurementRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesics

Identifiers

PMID27991651
PMCPMC6463792
OpenAlexW2112743461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.