Purpose
Existing clinical practice guidelines support the use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); however, a recent large randomized clinical trial (RCT) has questioned this practice. Therefore, we updated a previous systematic review to determine the efficacy and safety of NMBAs in ARDS.
Methods
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE (October 2012 to July 2019), the Cochrane (Central) database, and clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Register, and WHO ICTRP) for RCTs comparing the effects of NMBA as a continuous infusion versus placebo or no NMBA infusion (but allowing intermittent NMBA boluses) on patient-important outcomes for adults with ARDS. Two independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality of the primary studies and abstracted data.
Results
Seven RCTs, including four new RCTs, met eligibility criteria for this review. These trials enrolled 1598 patients with moderate to severe ARDS at centers in the USA, France, and China. All trials assessed short-term continuous infusions of cisatracurium or vecuronium. The pooled estimate for mortality outcomes showed significant statistical heterogeneity, which was only explained by a subgroup analysis by depth of sedation in the control arm. A continuous NMBA infusion did not improve mortality when compared to a light sedation strategy with no NMBA infusion (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% CI 0.86–1.15; moderate certainty; P = 0.93). On the other hand, continuous NMBA infusion reduced mortality when compared to deep sedation with as needed NMBA boluses (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.57–0.89; low certainty; P = 0.003). Continuous NMBA infusion reduced the rate of barotrauma (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35–0.85, moderate certainty; P = 0.008) across eligible trials, but the effect on ventilator-free days, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU-acquired weakness was uncertain.
Conclusions
Inconsistency in study methods and findings precluded the pooling of all trials for mortality. In a pre-planned sensitivity analysis, the impact of NMBA infusion on mortality depends on the strategy used in the control arm, showing reduced mortality when compared to deep sedation, but no effect on mortality when compared to lighter sedation. In both situations, a continuous NMBA infusion may reduce the risk of barotrauma, but the effects on other patient-important outcomes remain unclear. Future research, including an individual patient data meta-analysis, could help clarify some of the observed findings in this updated systematic review.
IntroductionRe‐transplant is an option for those who develop end‐stage lung disease due to rejection; however, little data exist following re‐transplantation in cystic fibrosis (CF).MethodsData from the Canadian CF Registry and US CF Foundation Patient Registry supplemented with data from United Network for Organ Sharing were used. Individuals who underwent a 2nd lung transplant between 2005 and 2019 were included. The Kaplan‐Meier method was used to estimate the probability of survival post‐second transplant at 1, 3, and 5‐years.ResultsOf those people who were waitlisted for a second transplant (N = 818), a total of 254 (31%) died waiting, 395 (48%) were transplanted and 169 (21%) people were alive on the waitlist. Median survival time after 2nd lung transplant was 3.3 years (95% CI: 2.8‐4.1). The 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year survival rates were 77.4% (95% CI: 73.1‐82%), 52% (95% CI: 46.7‐58%) and 39.4% (95% CI: 34.1‐45.6%).ConclusionsSurvival following second lung transplant in CF patients is lower than estimates following the first transplant. Over half of subjects who are potentially eligible for a second transplant die without receiving a second organ. This warrants further investigation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.