MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.burns.2025.107501

Медицинская библиотека · Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries · 2025

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Tsuchiya Emma Atsuko, Jensen-Abbew Jacob, Krag Mette, Møller Morten Hylander, Vestergaard Martin Risom, Haase Nicolai, Helleberg Marie, Holmgaard Rikke, Heiberg Johan

СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

In mechanically ventilated adult patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) has been shown to reduce the risk of infections and improve survival. While the benefits of SDD have been documented in this population, it remains unclear whether burn patients, who are at increased risk of infection and have distinct clinical characteristics, may experience similar benefits. In this systematic review we aimed to assess the desirable and undesirable patient-important effects of administering SDD to burn patients.

METHODS/

DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of SDD versus placebo or no SDD in burn patients. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included serious adverse events, antimicrobial resistance, pneumonia, blood stream infections, ICU- and hospital-free days, and 90-day mortality. We searched all major databases and followed the recommendations provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The certainty of evidence was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

We identified four RCTs with a total of 457 burn patients. All trials were assessed as having either 'some concerns' or 'high risk' of bias. The evidence was found to be very uncertain across all outcomes assessed. For mortality, the relative risk (RR) was 0.62 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.22-1.78, I2 = 75 %, random-effects model (REM), very low certainty evidence). For pneumonia, the RR was 0.75 (95 % CI 0.48-1.19, I2 = 0 %, fixed-effect model, very low certainty evidence). For bloodstream infections, the RR was 1.10 (95 % CI 0.71-1.69, I2 = 0 %, REM, very low certainty evidence). For hospital length of stay, the mean difference was -2.03 days (95 % CI -9.64-5.59, I2 = 51 %, REM, very low certainty evidence). We did not perform meta-analyses for the remaining secondary outcomes due to limited or no data. Trial sequential analysis could not be performed due to insufficient number of total participants and events in the included trials.

CONCLUSION

We found that the certainty of evidence is very low about the effects of SDD on patient-important outcomes in burn patients. Extrapolating from the evidence on mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients may be reasonable until more data from RCTs in burn patients emerge.

Для цитирования: Tsuchiya Emma Atsuko, Jensen-Abbew Jacob, Krag Mette, Møller Morten Hylander, Vestergaard Martin Risom, Haase Nicolai, Helleberg Marie, Holmgaard Rikke, Heiberg Johan. Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis.. Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2025.107501.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.