High-normal versus low-normal mean arterial pressure thresholds in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

PURPOSE: Targeted blood pressure thresholds remain unclear in critically ill patients. Two prior systematic reviews have not shown differences in mortality with a high mean arterial pressure (MAP) threshold, but there have been new studies published since. Thus, we conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effect of a high-normal vs low-normal MAP on mortality, favourable neurologic outcome, need for renal replacement therapy, and adverse vasopressor-induced events in critically ill patients. SOURCE: We searched six databases from inception until 1 October 2022 for RCTs of critically ill patients targeted to either a high-normal vs a low-normal MAP threshold for at least 24 hr. We assessed study quality using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias 2 tool and the risk ratio (RR) was used as the summary measure of association. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to assess the certainty of evidence. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We included eight RCTs with 4,561 patients. Four trials were conducted in patients following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, two in patients with distributive shock requiring vasopressors, one in patients with septic shock, and one in patients with hepatorenal syndrome. The pooled RRs for mortality (eight RCTs; 4,439 patients) and favourable neurologic outcome (four RCTs; 1,065 patients) were 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.14; moderate certainty) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.08; moderate certainty), respectively. The RR for the need for renal replacement therapy (four RCTs; 4,071 patients) was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.08; moderate certainty). There was no statistical between-study heterogeneity across all outcomes. CONCLUSION: This updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs found no differences in mortality, favourable neurologic outcome, or the need for renal replacement therapy between critically ill patients assigned to a high-normal vs low-normal MAP target. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42022307601); registered 28 February 2022.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les seuils de pression artérielle ciblés demeurent incertains chez les patient·es gravement malades. Deux revues systématiques antérieures n'ont pas montré de différences dans la mortalité avec un seuil élevé de pression artérielle moyenne (PAM), mais de nouvelles études ont été publiées depuis. Pour cette raison, nous avons réalisé une revue systématique mise à jour et une méta-analyse d'études randomisées contrôlées (ERC) comparant l'effet d'une PAM normale élevée vs normale faible sur la mortalité, les devenirs neurologiques favorables, la nécessité d'un traitement substitutif de l'insuffisance rénale et les événements indésirables induits par les vasopresseurs chez les patient·es gravement malades. SOURCES: Nous avons effectué des recherches dans six bases de données depuis leur création jusqu'au 1er octobre 2022 pour trouver des ERC portant sur des patient·es gravement malades chez lesquel·les un seuil de PAM normale élevée ou normale faible a été ciblé pendant au moins 24 heures. Nous avons évalué la qualité des études à l'aide de l'outil de risque de biais 2 révisé de Cochrane, et le risque relatif (RR) a été utilisé comme mesure sommaire de l'association. Nous avons utilisé le système de notation GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) pour évaluer la certitude des données probantes. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Nous avons inclus huit ERC portant sur 4561 personnes traitées. Quatre études ont été menées chez des patient·es à la suite d'un arrêt cardiaque hors de l'hôpital, deux chez des patient·es présentant un choc distributif nécessitant des vasopresseurs, une chez des patient·es présentant un choc septique et une chez des patient·es atteint·es d'un syndrome hépato-rénal. Les RR combinés pour la mortalité (huit ERC; 4439 personnes) et les devenirs neurologiques favorables (quatre ERC; 1065 personnes) étaient respectivement de 1,06 (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,99 à 1,14; certitude modérée) et de 0,99 (IC 95 %, 0,90 à 1,08; certitude modérée). Le RR pour le besoin de traitement substitutif de l'insuffisance rénale (quatre ERC; 4071 patient·es) était de 0,97 (IC 95 %, 0,87 à 1,08; certitude modérée). Il n'y avait pas d'hétérogénéité statistique entre les études pour tous les critères d'évaluation. CONCLUSION: Ces revue systématique et méta-analyse mises à jour des ERC n'ont révélé aucune différence dans la mortalité, les devenirs neurologiques favorables ou la nécessité d'un traitement substitutif de l'insuffisance rénale entre les patient·es gravement malades assigné·es à une cible de PAM normale élevée vs normale faible. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: PROSPERO (CRD42022307601); enregistrée le 28 février 2022.

Neurologic Prognostication After Cardiac Arrest Using Brain Biomarkers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Brain injury biomarkers released into circulation from the injured neurovascular unit are important prognostic tools in patients with cardiac arrest who develop hypoxic ischemic brain injury (HIBI) after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the neuroprognostic utility of bloodborne brain injury biomarkers in patients with cardiac arrest with HIBI. DATA SOURCES: Studies in electronic databases from inception to September 15, 2021. These databases included MEDLINE, Embase, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the World Health Organization Global Health Library. STUDY SELECTION: Articles included in this systmatic review and meta-analysis were independently assessed by 2 reviewers. We included studies that investigated neuron-specific enolase, S100 calcium-binding protein ß, glial fibrillary acidic protein, neurofilament light, tau, or ubiquitin carboxyl hydrolase L1 in patients with cardiac arrest aged 18 years and older for neurologic prognostication. We excluded studies that did not (1) dichotomize neurologic outcome as favorable vs unfavorable, (2) specify the timing of blood sampling or outcome determination, or (3) report diagnostic test accuracy or biomarker concentration. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data on the study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, brain biomarkers levels, diagnostic test accuracy, and neurologic outcome were recorded. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to calculate the area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and optimal thresholds for each biomarker. Risk of bias and concerns of applicability were assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. RESULTS: We identified 2953 studies, of which 86 studies with 10 567 patients (7777 men [73.6] and 2790 women [26.4]; pooled mean [SD] age, 62.8 [10.2] years) were included. Biomarker analysis at 48 hours after ROSC demonstrated that neurofilament light had the highest predictive value for unfavorable neurologic outcome, with an area under the curve of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.84-0.97). Subgroup analyses of patients treated with targeted temperature management and those who specifically had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest showed similar results (targeted temperature management, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.86-0.95] and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.86-0.97]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neurofilament light, which reflects white matter damage and axonal injury, yielded the highest accuracy in predicting neurologic outcome in patients with HIBI at 48 hours after ROSC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020157366.

Determining Optimal Mean Arterial Pressure After Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review.

The use of cerebral autoregulation monitoring to identify patient-specific optimal mean arterial pressure (MAPOPT) has emerged as a technique to augment cerebral oxygen delivery in post-cardiac arrest patients. Our systematic review aims to determine (a) the average MAPOPT in these patients, (b) the feasibility of identifying MAPOPT, (c) the brain tissue oxygenation levels when MAP is within proximity to the MAPOPT and (d) the relationship between neurological outcome and MAPOPT-targeted resuscitation strategies. We carried out this review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We included all studies that used cerebral autoregulation to determine MAPOPT in adult patients (> 16 years old) who achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) following cardiac arrest. All studies had to include our primary outcome of MAPOPT. We excluded studies where the patients had any history of traumatic brain injury, ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage. We identified six studies with 181 patients. There was wide variability in cerebral autoregulation monitoring methods, length of monitoring, calculation and reporting of MAPOPT. Amongst all studies, the median or mean MAPOPT was consistently above 65 mmHg (range 70-114 mmHg). Definitions of feasibility varied among studies and were difficult to summarize. Only one study noted that brain tissue oxygenation increased as patients' MAP approached MAPOPT. There was no consistent association between targeting MAPOPT and improved neurological outcome. There is considerable heterogeneity in MAPOPT due to differences in monitoring methods of autoregulation. Further research is needed to assess the clinical utility of MAPOPT-guided strategies on decreasing secondary injury and improving neurological outcomes after ROSC.