SynthesisCardiology journal2024
Should targeted temperature management be used in cardiogenic shock patients? Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Cardiology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTherapeutic hypothermia, or targeted temperature management (TTM), is a strategy of reducing the core body temperature of survivors of sudden cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock (CS) or stroke. Therefore, a systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed to tackle the question about whether the implementation of TTM is actually beneficial for patients with CS.
methodsStudy was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Scopus were searched from these databases inception to July 17, 2022. Eligible studies were those comparing TTM and non-TTM treatment in CS patients. Data were pooled with the Mantel-Haenszel method.
resultsThirty-day mortality was reported in 3 studies. Polled analysis of 30-day mortality was 44.2% for TTM group and 48.9% for non-TTM group (risk ratio: 0.90; 95% confidence interval: 0.75 to 1.08; p = 0.27). Other mortality follow-up periods showed also no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). The occurrence of adverse events in the studied groups also did not show statistically significant differences between TTM and non-TTM groups (p > 0.05 for myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, sepsis, pneumonia, stroke or bleeding events).
conclusionsThe present analysis shows no significant benefit of TTM in patients with CS. Moreover, no statistically significant increase of the incidence of adverse effects was found. However, further randomized studies with higher sample size and greater validity are needed to determine if TTM is worth implementing in CS patients.
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.