Should we Reconsider Published Studies During the Early Phase of the COVID Pandemic?

Fayed, Mohamed; Maroun, Wissam

doi:10.22541/au.167629962.23938718/v1

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Without more information on the exclusion criteria, determining the potential impact of that choice on the study’s findings is difficult. Additionally, the lack of a clear definition of prolonged prone positioning and intolerance further complicates the interpretation of the results [ 27 ]. The study by Shelhamer et al also had some limitations that could have affected the outcomes [ 23 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prone Vs. Supine Position Ventilation in Intubated COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Fayed¹,

Maroun²,

Elnahla³

et al. 2023

Cureus

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whether prone positioning of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 pneumonia has benefits over supine positioning is not clear. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine whether prone versus supine positioning during ventilation resulted in different outcomes for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for prospective and retrospective studies up through April 2023. We included studies that compared outcomes of patients with COVID-19 after ventilation in prone and supine positions. The primary outcomes were three mortality measures: hospital, overall, and intensive care unit (ICU). Secondary outcomes were mechanical ventilation days, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and hospital length of stay. We conducted risk of bias analysis and used meta-analysis software to analyze results. Mean difference (MD) was used for continuous data, and odds ratio (OR) was used for dichotomous data, both with 95% CIs.Significant heterogeneity (I 2 ) was considered if I 2 was >50%. A statistically significant result was considered if the p-value was <0.05. Of 1787 articles identified, 93 were retrieved, and seven retrospective cohort studies encompassing 5216 patients with COVID-19 were analyzed. ICU mortality was significantly higher in the prone group (OR 2.22, p=0.0004). No statistically significant difference was observed between prone and supine groups for hospital mortality (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.66-1.37; p=0.78) or overall mortality (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, p=0.71). Studies that analyzed primary outcomes had significant heterogeneity. Hospital length of stay was significantly higher in the prone than in the supine group (MD, 6.06; 95 % CI, p<0.0001). ICU length of stay and days of mechanical ventilation did not differ between the two groups. In conclusion, mechanical ventilation with prone positioning for all patients with COVID-19 pneumonia may not provide a mortality benefit over supine positioning.

show abstract

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%