Erica Aranha Suzumura

The quality of reporting of trial abstracts is suboptimal: Survey of major general medical journals

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the quality of reporting of abstracts describing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in four major general medical journals. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic survey of published RCT abstracts, with two reviewers independently extracting data. We searched MEDLINE and identified 227 RCT abstracts published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), British Medical Journal (BMJ), and The Lancet in the year 2006. RESULTS Most abstracts identified the study as a randomized trial (98.7%), reported the objectives (92.5%), described the population (90.3%), detailed the intervention (81.5%), and defined the primary outcome (71.3%). Methodological quality was poorly reported: one (0.4%) described allocation concealment; 21 (9.3%) clearly specified blinding; 51 (22.5%) described intention-to-treat analysis; and 32 (14.1%) outlined losses to follow-up. Most of the abstracts reported the effect size and the confidence intervals (62.3%), but just half of them reported side effects or harms. CONCLUSION The quality of reporting of RCT abstracts published in main general medical journals is suboptimal. Space limitations notwithstanding, with the recent recommendations from the CONSORT for Abstracts, it is expected that the transparency of abstract reporting can and should improve.

Effect of Lung Recruitment and Titrated Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) vs Low PEEP on Mortality in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance The effects of recruitment maneuvers and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration on clinical outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remain uncertain. Objective To determine if lung recruitment associated with PEEP titration according to the best respiratory-system compliance decreases 28-day mortality of patients with moderate to severe ARDS compared with a conventional low-PEEP strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 120 intensive care units (ICUs) from 9 countries from November 17, 2011, through April 25, 2017, enrolling adults with moderate to severe ARDS. Interventions An experimental strategy with a lung recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration according to the best respiratory–system compliance (n = 501; experimental group) or a control strategy of low PEEP (n = 509). All patients received volume-assist control mode until weaning. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was all-cause mortality until 28 days. Secondary outcomes were length of ICU and hospital stay; ventilator-free days through day 28; pneumothorax requiring drainage within 7 days; barotrauma within 7 days; and ICU, in-hospital, and 6-month mortality. Results A total of 1010 patients (37.5% female; mean [SD] age, 50.9 [17.4] years) were enrolled and followed up. At 28 days, 277 of 501 patients (55.3%) in the experimental group and 251 of 509 patients (49.3%) in the control group had died (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.42; P = .041). Compared with the control group, the experimental group strategy increased 6-month mortality (65.3% vs 59.9%; HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.38; P = .04), decreased the number of mean ventilator-free days (5.3 vs 6.4; difference, −1.1; 95% CI, −2.1 to −0.1; P = .03), increased the risk of pneumothorax requiring drainage (3.2% vs 1.2%; difference, 2.0%; 95% CI, 0.0% to 4.0%; P = .03), and the risk of barotrauma (5.6% vs 1.6%; difference, 4.0%; 95% CI, 1.5% to 6.5%; P = .001). There were no significant differences in the length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, ICU mortality, and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions and Relevance In patients with moderate to severe ARDS, a strategy with lung recruitment and titrated PEEP compared with low PEEP increased 28-day all-cause mortality. These findings do not support the routine use of lung recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration in these patients. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01374022

Association between pre-operative statin use and major cardiovascular complications among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: the VISION study

AIMS The aim of this study was to assess the effects of pre-operative statin therapy on cardiovascular events in the first 30-days after non-cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS We conducted an international, prospective, cohort study of patients who were ≥45 years having in-patient non-cardiac surgery. We estimated the probability of receiving statins pre-operatively using a multivariable logistic model and conducted a propensity score analysis to correct for confounding. A total of 15 478 patients were recruited at 12 centres in eight countries from August 2007 to January 2011. The matched population consisted of 2845 patients (18.4%) treated with a statin and 4492 (29.0%) controls. The pre-operative use of statins was associated with lower risk of the primary outcome, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS), or stroke at 30 days [relative risk (RR), 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.73-0.95; P = 0.007]. Statins were also associated with a significant lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40-0.83; P = 0.003), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.76; P = 0.004), and MINS (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73-0.98; P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of myocardial infarction or stroke. CONCLUSION Among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, pre-operative statin therapy was independently associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes at 30 days. These results require confirmation in a large randomized trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials.gov NCT00512109.

Como avaliar criticamente revisões sistemáticas e metanálises

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Systematic reviews are important knowledge generating tools to help the decision making process in the Critical Care Unit. This narrative aims to describe the important elements used to critically appraise intensive care-related systematic reviews. CONTENTS: When critically assessing systematic reviews, one should pay particular attention to the importance and appropriateness of the research question, the search strategy, the inclusion criteria and methodological quality of the studies included, and the methods of data extraction. In addition, a relevant systematic review must have consistent data (in case of a meta-analysis) or the cause of the heterogeneity must have been adequately explored, and results must be applicable in critical patients. CONCLUSIONS: To apply correctly the available scientific evidence, one should critically assess data quality of systematic reviews, selecting the relevant information to manage the critically ill patient.

Como avaliar criticamente estudos de coorte em terapia intensiva

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cohort studies are useful to identify risk and prognostic factors, assess disease natural history and verify the impact of diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. This article aims to guide readers on how to critically assess papers using a cohort research design. CONTENTS: For a critical appraisal of cohort studies, one must observe: the existence of selection and information bias, the continuity of the follow-up, the control of confounding variables, the significance of the results and its applicability in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of factors which affect the quality of cohort studies allows intensive care professionals to select the best available evidence to guide the decision making process.

Como avaliar criticamente um ensaio clínico de alocação aleatória em terapia intensiva

Ensaios clinicos aleatorizados sao investigacoes cientificas consideradas padrao-ouro para avaliar intervencoes terapeuticas. Ensaios clinicos aleatorizados podem examinar e avaliar a seguranca e eficacia de novas drogas ou procedimentos terapeuticos ou comparar os efeitos entre duas ou mais drogas ou qualquer outra intervencao. Nesse artigo apresentamos as caracteristicas essenciais e fatores que podem introduzir vies nesses estudos. Em seguida, apresentamos criterios para avaliacao critica de artigos reportando os resultados de ensaios clinicos aleatorizados e mostramos como interpretar e aplica-los a pratica clinica.

Effects of perioperative statin use on cardiovascular complications in patients submitted to non-cardiac surgery: protocol for a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis

BackgroundPreliminary evidence suggests statins may reduce major perioperative vascular events. However, evidence is limited to observational studies, underpowered trials, and non-comprehensive systematic reviews. This review aims to assess the effects of perioperative statin use on cardiovascular complications in patients submitted to non-cardiac surgery.MethodsWe will search MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of perioperative statin use in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery and reporting cardiovascular complications. For patients already using statins for hyperlipidemia, a preoperative loading dose of statin is required in the experimental group. We will place no language or publication restriction on our search. Teams of two reviewers will independently assess eligibility and risk of bias, and will extract data from the included trials. Our primary outcome is a combination of cardiovascular mortality or non-fatal myocardial infarction. We will also assess the following outcomes: individual components of the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, total myocardial infarction, elevated troponin in the first seven postoperative days, total stroke, total venous thromboembolism, postoperative atrial fibrillation, elevation of creatine phosphokinase or liver enzymes, and rates of myalgia or rhabdomyolysis. We will conduct meta-analyses using random-effects model and will use trial sequential analysis to establish monitoring boundaries to limit global type I error due to repetitive testing for our primary outcome. We will rate the quality of evidence using the GRADE system.DiscussionThe results of this systematic review may help to inform clinical practice and also the design of future large-scale randomized trials.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016035987

Large randomized controlled trials in perioperative cardiovascular medicine: a proposal for the design, conduct and efficient management

El numero de pacientes sometidos a cirugias no-cardiacas esta aumentando en todo el mundo. A fin de impartir una asistencia eficiente a los pacientes durante la cirugia, necesitamos mejorar nuestro conocimiento sobre como evitar eventos cardiovasculares perioperatorios mayores durante la cirugia no-cardiaca. Para alcanzar este objetivo, es necesario realizar ensayos clinicos aleatorios que pueden proveer resultados conclusivos y confiables en este campo. Esta revision narrativa describe una propuesta para el delineamiento, la conduccion y la gestion de ensayos clinicos aleatorios y a larga escala en medicina cardiovascular perioperatoria.The number of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery is growing worldwide. To optimally assist patients during the perioperative period, we must improve our knowledge of how to prevent major perioperative cardiovascular events around the time of noncardiac surgery. To achieve this goal there is a need for large randomized controlled trials that can provide reliable and conclusive results in this field. This narrative review describes a proposal for the design, conduct and management of large controlled trials in perioperative cardiovascular medicine.

Noninvasive Brain Stimulations for Unilateral Spatial Neglect after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Controlled Trials

Background Unilateral spatial neglect (USN) is the most frequent perceptual disorder after stroke. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a tool that has been used in the rehabilitation process to modify cortical excitability and improve perception and functional capacity. Objective To assess the impact of NIBS on USN after stroke. Methods An extensive search was conducted up to July 2016. Studies were selected if they were controlled and noncontrolled trials examining transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and theta burst stimulation (TBS) in USN after stroke, with outcomes measured by standardized USN and functional tests. Results Twelve RCTs (273 participants) and 4 non-RCTs (94 participants) proved eligible. We observed a benefit in overall USN measured by the line bisection test with NIBS in comparison to sham (SMD −2.35, 95% CI −3.72, −0.98; p = 0.0001); the rTMS yielded results that were consistent with the overall meta-analysis (SMD −2.82, 95% CI −3.66, −1.98; p = 0.09). The rTMS compared with sham also suggested a benefit in overall USN measured by Motor-Free Visual Perception Test at both 1 Hz (SMD 1.46, 95% CI 0.73, 2.20; p < 0.0001) and 10 Hz (SMD 1.19, 95% CI 0.48, 1.89; p = 0.54). There was also a benefit in overall USN measured by Alberts test and the line crossing test with 1 Hz rTMS compared to sham (SMD 2.04, 95% CI 1.14, 2.95; p < 0.0001). Conclusions The results suggest a benefit of NIBS on overall USN, and we conclude that rTMS is more efficacious compared to sham for USN after stroke.

Ensaios clínicos aleatórios de larga escala em medicina cardiovascular perioperatória: uma proposta para delineamento, condução e gerenciamento eficiente

El numero de pacientes sometidos a cirugias no-cardiacas esta aumentando en todo el mundo. A fin de impartir una asistencia eficiente a los pacientes durante la cirugia, necesitamos mejorar nuestro conocimiento sobre como evitar eventos cardiovasculares perioperatorios mayores durante la cirugia no-cardiaca. Para alcanzar este objetivo, es necesario realizar ensayos clinicos aleatorios que pueden proveer resultados conclusivos y confiables en este campo. Esta revision narrativa describe una propuesta para el delineamiento, la conduccion y la gestion de ensayos clinicos aleatorios y a larga escala en medicina cardiovascular perioperatoria.The number of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery is growing worldwide. To optimally assist patients during the perioperative period, we must improve our knowledge of how to prevent major perioperative cardiovascular events around the time of noncardiac surgery. To achieve this goal there is a need for large randomized controlled trials that can provide reliable and conclusive results in this field. This narrative review describes a proposal for the design, conduct and management of large controlled trials in perioperative cardiovascular medicine.