scholarly journals Associations between multimorbidity and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e038401
Author(s):  
Michael K. Sullivan ◽  
Alastair J. Rankin ◽  
Bhautesh D. Jani ◽  
Frances S. Mair ◽  
Patrick B. Mark

ObjectiveTo systematically review the literature exploring the associations between multimorbidity (the presence of two or more long-term conditions (LTCs)) and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS (1946–2019). The main search terms were ‘Chronic Kidney Failure’ and ‘Multimorbid*’.Eligibility criteriaObservational studies of adults over the age of 18 with CKD stages 3–5, that is, estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The exposure was multimorbidity quantified by measures and the outcomes were all-cause mortality, renal progression, hospitalisation and cardiovascular events. We did not consider CKD as a comorbid LTC.Data extraction and synthesisNewcastle-Ottawa Scale for quality appraisal and risk of bias assessment and fixed effects meta-analysis for data synthesis.ResultsOf 1852 papers identified, 26 met the inclusion criteria. 21 papers involved patients with advanced CKD and no studies were from low or middle-income countries. All-cause mortality was an outcome in all studies. Patients with multimorbidity were at higher risk of mortality compared with patients without multimorbidity (total risk ratio 2.28 (95% CI 1.81 to 2.88)). The risk of mortality was higher with increasing multimorbidity (total HR 1.31 (95% CI 1.27 to 1.36)) and both concordant and discordant LTCs were associated with heightened risk. Multimorbidity was associated with renal progression in four studies, hospitalisation in five studies and cardiovascular events in two studies.LimitationsMeta-analysis could only include 10 of 26 papers as the methodologies of studies were heterogeneous.ConclusionsThere are associations between multimorbidity and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with CKD. However, most data relate to mortality risk in patients with advanced CKD. There is limited evidence regarding patients with mild to moderate CKD, outcomes such as cardiovascular events, types of LTCs and regarding patients from low or middle-income countries.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019147424.

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. e0212558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor Granados-García ◽  
Yvonne N. Flores ◽  
Lizbeth I. Díaz-Trejo ◽  
Lucia Méndez-Sánchez ◽  
Stephanie Liu ◽  
...  

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleni Papoutsi ◽  
Vassilis G. Giannakoulis ◽  
Eleni Xourgia ◽  
Christina Routsi ◽  
Anastasia Kotanidou ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although several international guidelines recommend early over late intubation of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), this issue is still controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect (if any) of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 by carrying out a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods PubMed and Scopus were systematically searched, while references and preprint servers were explored, for relevant articles up to December 26, 2020, to identify studies which reported on mortality and/or morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing early versus late intubation. “Early” was defined as intubation within 24 h from intensive care unit (ICU) admission, while “late” as intubation at any time after 24 h of ICU admission. All-cause mortality and duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) were the primary outcomes of the meta-analysis. Pooled risk ratio (RR), pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020222147). Results A total of 12 studies, involving 8944 critically ill patients with COVID-19, were included. There was no statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality between patients undergoing early versus late intubation (3981 deaths; 45.4% versus 39.1%; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99–1.15, p = 0.08). This was also the case for duration of MV (1892 patients; MD − 0.58 days, 95% CI − 3.06 to 1.89 days, p = 0.65). In a sensitivity analysis using an alternate definition of early/late intubation, intubation without versus with a prior trial of high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive mechanical ventilation was still not associated with a statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality (1128 deaths; 48.9% versus 42.5%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99–1.25, p = 0.08). Conclusions The synthesized evidence suggests that timing of intubation may have no effect on mortality and morbidity of critically ill patients with COVID-19. These results might justify a wait-and-see approach, which may lead to fewer intubations. Relevant guidelines may therefore need to be updated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document