Sachin Sud

Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND The choice between coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for revascularisation in patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, who account for 25% of revascularisation procedures, is much debated. We aimed to assess whether all-cause mortality differed between patients with diabetes who had CABG or PCI by doing a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CABG with PCI in the modern stent era. METHODS We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from Jan 1, 1980, to March 12, 2013, for studies reported in English. Eligible studies were those in which investigators enrolled adult patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, randomised them to CABG (with arterial conduits in at least 80% of participants) or PCI (with stents in at least 80% of participants), and reported outcomes separately in patients with diabetes, with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. We used random-effects models to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs for pooled data. We assessed heterogeneity using I(2). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in patients with diabetes who had CABG compared with those who had PCI at 5-year (or longest) follow-up. FINDINGS The initial search strategy identified 3414 citations, of which eight trials were eligible. These eight trials included 7468 participants, of whom 3612 had diabetes. Four of the RCTs used bare metal stents (BMS; ERACI II, ARTS, SoS, MASS II) and four used drug-eluting stents (DES; FREEDOM, SYNTAX, VA CARDS, CARDia). At mean or median 5-year (or longest) follow-up, individuals with diabetes allocated to CABG had lower all-cause mortality than did those allocated to PCI (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.86; p=0.002; I(2)=25%; 3131 patients, eight trials). Treatment effects in individuals without diabetes showed no mortality benefit (1.03, 0.77-1.37; p=0.78; I(2)=46%; 3790 patients, five trials; p interaction=0.03). We identified no differences in outcome whether PCI was done with BMS or DES. When present, we identified no clear causes of heterogeneity. INTERPRETATION In the modern era of stenting and optimum medical therapy, revascularisation of patients with diabetes and multivessel disease by CABG decreases long-term mortality by about a third compared with PCI using either BMS or DES. CABG should be strongly considered for these patients.

Effect of mechanical ventilation in the prone position on clinical outcomes in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Mechanical ventilation in the prone position is used to improve oxygenation in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. We sought to determine the effect of mechanical ventilation in the prone position on mortality, oxygenation, duration of ventilation and adverse events in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Methods: In this systematic review we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Science Citation Index Expanded for articles published from database inception to February 2008. We also conducted extensive manual searches and contacted experts. We extracted physiologic data and clinically relevant outcomes. Results: Thirteen trials that enrolled a total of 1559 patients met our inclusion criteria. Overall methodologic quality was good. In 10 of the trials (n = 1486) reporting this outcome, we found that prone positioning did not reduce mortality among hypoxemic patients (risk ratio [RR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–1.09; p = 0.52). The lack of effect of ventilation in the prone position on mortality was similar in trials of prolonged prone positioning and in patients with acute lung injury. In 8 of the trials (n = 633), the ratio of partial pressure of oxygen to inspired fraction of oxygen on day 1 was 34% higher among patients in the prone position than among those who remained supine (p < 0.001); these results were similar in 4 trials on day 2 and in 5 trials on day 3. In 9 trials (n = 1206), the ratio in patients assigned to the prone group remained 6% higher the morning after they returned to the supine position compared with patients assigned to the supine group (p = 0.07). Results were quantitatively similar but statistically significant in 7 trials on day 2 and in 6 trials on day 3 (p = 0.001). In 5 trials (n = 1004), prone positioning was associated with a reduced risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66–0.99; p = 0.04) but not with a reduced duration of ventilation. In 6 trials (n = 504), prone positioning was associated with an increased risk of pressure ulcers (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.07–1.71; p = 0.01). Most analyses found no to moderate between-trial heterogeneity. Interpretation: Mechanical ventilation in the prone position does not reduce mortality or duration of ventilation despite improved oxygenation and a decreased risk of pneumonia. Therefore, it should not be used routinely for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. However, a sustained improvement in oxygenation may support the use of prone positioning in patients with very severe hypoxemia, who have not been well-studied to date.

Effect of prone positioning during mechanical ventilation on mortality among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Mechanical ventilation in the prone position is used to improve oxygenation and to mitigate the harmful effects of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We sought to determine the effect of prone positioning on mortality among patients with ARDS receiving protective lung ventilation. Methods: We searched electronic databases and conference proceedings to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through August 2013. We included RCTs that compared prone and supine positioning during mechanical ventilation in patients with ARDS. We assessed risk of bias and obtained data on all-cause mortality (determined at hospital discharge or, if unavailable, after longest follow-up period). We used random-effects models for the pooled analyses. Results: We identified 11 RCTs (n = 2341) that met our inclusion criteria. In the 6 trials (n = 1016) that used a protective ventilation strategy with reduced tidal volumes, prone positioning significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.59–0.95; I2 = 29%) compared with supine positioning. The mortality benefit remained in several sensitivity analyses. The overall quality of evidence was high. The risk of bias was low in all of the trials except one, which was small. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I2 < 50%) for most of the clinical and physiologic outcomes. Interpretation: Our analysis of high-quality evidence showed that use of the prone position during mechanical ventilation improved survival among patients with ARDS who received protective lung ventilation.

Management of Bell palsy: clinical practice guideline

Bell palsy is an idiopathic weakness or paralysis of the face of peripheral nerve origin, with acute onset. It affects 20–30 persons per 100 000 annually, and 1 in 60 individuals will be affected over the course of their lifetime.[1][1],[2][2] The major cause of Bell palsy is believed to be an

Screening and prevention of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients: a decision analysis and economic evaluation.

RATIONALE Venous thromboembolism is difficult to diagnose in critically ill patients and may increase morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies to reduce morbidity from venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. METHODS A Markov decision analytic model to compare weekly compression ultrasound screening (screening) plus investigation for clinically suspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (case finding) versus case finding alone; and a hypothetical program to increase adherence to DVT prevention. Probabilities were derived from a systematic review of venous thromboembolism in medical-surgical intensive care unit patients. Costs (in 2010

Severity of Hypoxemia and Effect of High Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation in ARDS.

US) were obtained from hospitals in Canada, Australia, and the United States, and the medical literature. Analyses were conducted from a societal perspective over a lifetime horizon. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS In the base case, the rate of proximal DVT was 85 per 1,000 patients. Screening resulted in three fewer pulmonary emboli than case-finding alone but also two additional bleeding episodes, and cost

Cost-effectiveness of Dalteparin vs Unfractionated Heparin for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients

223,801 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, screening cost less than

Effect of prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and high Simplified Acute Physiology Score Ii

50,000 per QALY only if the probability of proximal DVT increased from a baseline of 8.5-16%. By comparison, increasing adherence to appropriate pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis by 10% resulted in 16 fewer DVTs, one fewer pulmonary emboli, and one additional heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and bleeding event, and cost

Economic evaluation of the prophylaxis for thromboembolism in critical care trial (E-PROTECT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

27,953 per QALY gained. Programs achieving increased adherence to best-practice venous thromboembolism prevention were cost-effective over a wide range of program costs and were robust in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS Appropriate prophylaxis provides better value in terms of costs and health gains than routine screening for DVT. Resources should be targeted at optimizing thromboprophylaxis.

Prone Position Ventilation for Community-acquired Pneumonia

Rationale: High‐frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) is theoretically beneficial for lung protection, but the results of clinical trials are inconsistent, with study‐level meta‐analyses suggesting no significant effect on mortality. Objectives: The aim of this individual patient data meta‐analysis was to identify acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patient subgroups with differential outcomes from HFOV. Methods: After a comprehensive search for trials, two reviewers independently identified randomized trials comparing HFOV with conventional ventilation for adults with ARDS. Prespecified effect modifiers were tested using multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models, adjusting for important prognostic factors and clustering effects. Measurements and Main Results: Data from 1,552 patients in four trials were analyzed, applying uniform definitions for study variables and outcomes. Patients had a mean baseline PaO2/FiO2 of 114 ± 39 mm Hg; 40% had severe ARDS (PaO2/FiO2 <100 mm Hg). Mortality at 30 days was 321 of 785 (40.9%) for HFOV patients versus 288 of 767 (37.6%) for control subjects (adjusted odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.94‐1.46; P = 0.16). This treatment effect varied, however, depending on baseline severity of hypoxemia (P = 0.0003), with harm increasing with PaO2/FiO2 among patients with mild‐moderate ARDS, and the possibility of decreased mortality in patients with very severe ARDS. Compliance and body mass index did not modify the treatment effect. HFOV increased barotrauma risk compared with conventional ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.04‐2.96; P = 0.04). Conclusions: HFOV increases mortality for most patients with ARDS but may improve survival among patients with severe hypoxemia on conventional mechanical ventilation.