scholarly journals Safety and feasibility of lung biopsy in diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e043600
Author(s):  
Yosuke Fukuda ◽  
Hiroshi Sugimoto ◽  
Yoshie Yamada ◽  
Hiroyuki Ito ◽  
Takeshi Tanaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Lung Biopsy ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Pathological Findings

IntroductionAcute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a type of acute respiratory failure characterised by non-cardiac pulmonary oedema caused by various underlying conditions. ARDS is often pathologically characterised by diffuse alveolar damage, and its pathological findings have been reported to be associated with prognosis, although the adverse effects of lung biopsies to obtain pathological findings are still unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to reveal the safety and feasibility of lung biopsy in the diagnosis of ARDS.Methods and analysisWe will include studies that were published in MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until 1 June 2020. We will include the reports for critically ill patients in an intensive care unit or emergency department who undergo lung biopsy and require a mechanical ventilation. Two review authors will independently scan titles and abstracts of all identified studies. Furthermore, these two authors will read and assess the full text of study reports to identify trials that appeared broadly to address the subject of the review. We will perform a risk of bias assessment using the McMaster Quality Assessment Scale of Harms.Ethics and disseminationThis study will be based on the published data, therefore, it does not require ethical approval. The final results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberUMIN000040650.

scholarly journals Safety and feasibility of lung biopsy in diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yosuke Fukuda ◽  
Hiroshi Sugimoto ◽  
Yoshie Yamada ◽  
Hiroyuki Ito ◽  
Takeshi Tanaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Lung Biopsy ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Pathological Findings

AbstractIntroductionAcute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a type of acute respiratory failure characterized by non-cardiac pulmonary edema caused by various underlying conditions. ARDS is often pathologically characterized by diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), and its pathological findings have been reported to be associated with prognosis, although the adverse effects of lung biopsies to obtain pathological findings are still unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to reveal the safety and feasibility of lung biopsy in the diagnosis of ARDS.Methods and analysisWe will include studies that were published in MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until June 1, 2020. We will include the reports for critically ill patients in an intensive care unit or emergency department who undergo lung biopsy and require a mechanical ventilation. Two review authors will independently scan titles and abstracts of all identified studies. Furthermore, these two authors will read and assess the full text of study reports to identify trials that appeared broadly to address the subject of the review. We will perform a risk of bias assessment using the McMaster Quality Assessment Scale of Harms.Ethics and disseminationThis study will be based on the published data, therefore, it does not require ethical approval. The final results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.UMIN registration numberUMIN000040650Strengths and limitations of this studyThis protocol complies with the Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol guidelines.This systematic review and meta-analysis will assess the safety and feasibility of lung biopsy in patients with ARDS.We will evaluate the risk of bias and report according to the McMaster Quality Assessment Scale of Harms.This review will include the reports about only adult patients with acute respiratory failure.We will plan to exclude non-English databases in this study.

scholarly journals Incidence and Mortality of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Patients With Burns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baoli Wang ◽  
Wei Chenru ◽  
Yong Jiang ◽  
Lunyang Hu ◽  
He Fang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Inhalation Injury ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Objective: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively estimate the incidence and mortality of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in overall and subgroups of patients with burns.Data sources: Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL databases, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure database were searched until September 1, 2021.Study selection: Articles that report study data on incidence or mortality of ARDS in patients with burns were selected.Data extraction: Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality. We performed a meta-analysis of the incidence and mortality of ARDS in patients with burns using a random effects model, which made subgroup analysis according to the study type, inclusion (mechanical ventilation, minimal burn surface), definitions of ARDS, geographic location, mean age, burn severity, and inhalation injury. Primary outcomes were the incidence and mortality of burns patients with ARDS, and secondary outcomes were incidence for different subgroups.Data synthesis: Pooled weighted estimate of the incidence and mortality of ARDS in patients with burns was 0.24 [95% confidence interval (CI)0.2–0.28] and 0.31 [95% CI 0.18−0.44]. Incidences of ARDS were obviously higher in patients on mechanical ventilation (incidence = 0.37), diagnosed by Berlin definition (incidence = 0.35), and with over 50% inhalation injury proportion (incidence = 0.41) than in overall patients with burns. Patients with burns who came from western countries and with inhalation injury have a significantly higher incidence of ARDS compared with those who came from Asian/African countries (0.28 vs. 0.25) and without inhalation injury (0.41 vs. 0.24).Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the incidence of ARDS in patients with burns is 24% and that mortality is as high as 31%. The incidence rates are related to mechanical ventilation, location, and inhalation injury. The patients with burns from western countries and with inhalation injury have a significantly higher incidence than patients from Asian/African countries and without inhalation injury.Systematic Review Registration: identifier: CRD42021144888.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document