Minerva anestesiologica · 2024
Survival difference in patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19 vs. non-COVID ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bertini Pietro, Marabotti Alberto, Sangalli Fabio, Paternoster Gianluca
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the need for effective management of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) using veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). This meta-analysis aims to compare the effectiveness and outcomes of ECMO in patients with COVID-19 ARDS versus those with non-COVID ARDS, assessing its role in different respiratory virus infections.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and other relevant databases up to June 30, 2023, to identify studies comparing ECMO use in COVID-19 and non-COVID ARDS cases. This analysis adheres to PRISMA guidelines, with studies rigorously selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed for bias using validated tools.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The meta-analysis included 24 studies with 2,121 patients, revealing that non-COVID ARDS patients treated with ECMO had a lower mortality risk compared to those with COVID-19 ARDS. Specifically, the overall pooled risk difference in survival was -0.11 (95% CI: -0.17 to -0.05, P<0.001), indicating a statistically significant advantage for non-COVID patients. The standardized mean difference for ECMO duration was significantly longer in COVID-19 patients (SMD=0.70, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.08, P<0.001), reflecting more prolonged treatment needs.
CONCLUSIONS: ECMO serves as a vital intervention in severe ARDS, with differential effectiveness observed between COVID-19 and non-COVID patients. The study's findings underline the need for precise patient selection and tailored ECMO application across different viral etiologies. These insights are crucial for enhancing clinical strategies and resource allocation during ongoing and future pandemics.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and other relevant databases up to June 30, 2023, to identify studies comparing ECMO use in COVID-19 and non-COVID ARDS cases. This analysis adheres to PRISMA guidelines, with studies rigorously selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed for bias using validated tools.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The meta-analysis included 24 studies with 2,121 patients, revealing that non-COVID ARDS patients treated with ECMO had a lower mortality risk compared to those with COVID-19 ARDS. Specifically, the overall pooled risk difference in survival was -0.11 (95% CI: -0.17 to -0.05, P<0.001), indicating a statistically significant advantage for non-COVID patients. The standardized mean difference for ECMO duration was significantly longer in COVID-19 patients (SMD=0.70, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.08, P<0.001), reflecting more prolonged treatment needs.
CONCLUSIONS: ECMO serves as a vital intervention in severe ARDS, with differential effectiveness observed between COVID-19 and non-COVID patients. The study's findings underline the need for precise patient selection and tailored ECMO application across different viral etiologies. These insights are crucial for enhancing clinical strategies and resource allocation during ongoing and future pandemics.