Publication:
Risks and benefits of hypotensive resuscitation in patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock: A meta-analysis

dc.contributor.authorNatthida Owattanapanichen_US
dc.contributor.authorKaweesak Chittawatanaraten_US
dc.contributor.authorThoetphum Benyakornen_US
dc.contributor.authorJatuporn Sirikunen_US
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Medicine, Thammasat Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherChiang Mai Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-23T11:32:16Z
dc.date.available2019-08-23T11:32:16Z
dc.date.issued2018-12-17en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2018 The Author(s). Background: Damage control strategies play an important role in trauma patient management. One such strategy, hypotensive resuscitation, is being increasingly employed. Although several randomized controlled trials have reported its benefits, the mortality benefit of hypotensive resuscitation has not yet been systematically reviewed. Objectives: To conduct a meta-analysis of the efficacy of hypotensive resuscitation in traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients relative to mortality as the primary outcome, with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), acute kidney injury (AKI), and multiple organ dysfunction as the secondary outcomes. Methods: PubMed, Medline-Ovid, Scopus, Science Direct, EMBASE, and CNKI database searches were conducted. An additional search of relevant primary literature and review articles was also performed. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies reporting the mortality rate associated with hypotensive resuscitation or limited fluid resuscitation were selected. The random-effects model was used to estimate mortality and onset of other complications. Results: Of 2114 studies, 30 were selected for this meta-analysis. A statistically significant decrease in mortality was observed in the hypotensive resuscitation group (risk ratio [RR]: 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.61). Heterogeneity was observed in the included literature (I 2 : 27%; degrees of freedom: 23; p = 0.11). Less usage of packed red cell transfusions and fluid resuscitations was also demonstrated. No significant difference between groups was observed for AKI; however, a protective effect was observed relative to both multiple organ dysfunction and ARDS. Conclusions: This meta-analysis revealed significant benefits of hypotensive resuscitation relative to mortality in traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients. It not only reduced the need for blood transfusions and the incidences of ARDS and multiple organ dysfunction, but it caused a non-significant AKI incidence.en_US
dc.identifier.citationScandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine. Vol.26, No.1 (2018)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13049-018-0572-4en_US
dc.identifier.issn17577241en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85058617603en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46119
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85058617603&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleRisks and benefits of hypotensive resuscitation in patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock: A meta-analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85058617603&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections