TY - JOUR
T1 - Steroid treatment in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome
T2 - a systematic review and network meta-analysis
AU - Yoshihiro, Shodai
AU - Hongo, Takashi
AU - Ohki, Shingo
AU - Kaneko, Tadashi
AU - Ishikawa, Junichi
AU - Ihara, Shoichi
AU - Taito, Shunsuke
AU - Sakaguchi, Masahiko
AU - Yatabe, Tomoaki
N1 - Funding Information:
We greatly appreciate that Dr. Jesús Villar, Prof. Djillai Annane and Prof. G. Umberto Meduri provided additional information about their studies.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists.
PY - 2022/2
Y1 - 2022/2
N2 - Purpose: Although the most recent systematic review and meta-analyses on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have shown that the use of steroids decreases mortality in adult patients, its benefits and risks may differ depending on the type and dosage of the steroid. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the differences in the efficacy among different doses and types of steroids. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ICHUSHI, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP databases from the earliest records to March 2021 for randomized control trials, which compared steroids with placebo or conventional therapy for ARDS. Using the random-effects model, we compared various categories of steroids (high-dose methylprednisolone, low-dose methylprednisolone, hydrocortisone, dexamethasone, and no steroid) concerning hospital mortality, incidence of infection, and ventilator-free days (VFD). Results: We analyzed nine studies involving adult patients (n = 1212). Although there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the mortality and incidence of infection, the number of VFD were greater when using low-dose methylprednisolone than when not using any steroids (Mean difference: 6.06; 95% confidence intervals: [2.5, 10.5]). Moreover, the rank probability showed that low-dose methylprednisolone might be the optimal treatment, whereas using no steroid or high-dose methylprednisolone may be inferior to other treatments in terms of mortality, infection, and VFD. Conclusion: This NMA suggested that the effect of steroids on the outcome in patients with ARDS might depend on the type of the steroid drug administered. Moreover, further studies are needed to identify the optimal type and dosage.
AB - Purpose: Although the most recent systematic review and meta-analyses on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have shown that the use of steroids decreases mortality in adult patients, its benefits and risks may differ depending on the type and dosage of the steroid. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the differences in the efficacy among different doses and types of steroids. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ICHUSHI, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP databases from the earliest records to March 2021 for randomized control trials, which compared steroids with placebo or conventional therapy for ARDS. Using the random-effects model, we compared various categories of steroids (high-dose methylprednisolone, low-dose methylprednisolone, hydrocortisone, dexamethasone, and no steroid) concerning hospital mortality, incidence of infection, and ventilator-free days (VFD). Results: We analyzed nine studies involving adult patients (n = 1212). Although there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the mortality and incidence of infection, the number of VFD were greater when using low-dose methylprednisolone than when not using any steroids (Mean difference: 6.06; 95% confidence intervals: [2.5, 10.5]). Moreover, the rank probability showed that low-dose methylprednisolone might be the optimal treatment, whereas using no steroid or high-dose methylprednisolone may be inferior to other treatments in terms of mortality, infection, and VFD. Conclusion: This NMA suggested that the effect of steroids on the outcome in patients with ARDS might depend on the type of the steroid drug administered. Moreover, further studies are needed to identify the optimal type and dosage.
KW - Critical care
KW - Network meta-analysis
KW - Respiratory insufficiency
KW - Steroids
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85118836464&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85118836464&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00540-021-03016-5
DO - 10.1007/s00540-021-03016-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 34757498
AN - SCOPUS:85118836464
SN - 0913-8668
VL - 36
SP - 107
EP - 121
JO - Journal of Anesthesia
JF - Journal of Anesthesia
IS - 1
ER -