Burst-suppression and Postoperative Delirium: Comment

医学 右美托咪定 谵妄 突发抑制 麻醉 脑电图 随机对照试验 术后认知功能障碍 认知 重症监护医学 精神科 镇静 内科学
作者
Hilary P. Grocott
出处
期刊:Anesthesiology [Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer)]
卷期号:134 (2): 351-352 被引量:2
标识
DOI:10.1097/aln.0000000000003631
摘要

The recent report by Pedemonte et al.1 of their substudy of the Minimizing ICU Neurologic Dysfunction with Dexmedetomidine-induced Sleep (MINDDS) study2 emphasized the relationship between electroencephalogram (EEG) burst-suppression during cardiopulmonary bypass and delirium in elderly patients undergoing cardiac surgery. It raises several important points regarding the potential for cerebral monitoring to identify patients who may be at risk for significant postoperative neurologic complications, including delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction. However, interpreting these complex relationships requires certain safeguards to minimize the risk of potential false discovery, and thus maximize the confidence in a study’s conclusions. These safeguards include, but are not limited to, clear adherence to the prespecified substudy aims and a priori hypotheses, the development of a data statistical analytic plan before accessing the data, and consideration to the potential moderating effects in the substudy from the intervention of the parent trial. In this case, for example, the data from the substudy were derived from an ongoing randomized controlled trial investigating the potential effects of dexmedetomidine on postoperative delirium. It would seem reasonable then for any analysis in the substudy to be adjusted for the use of dexmedetomidine. Clarification as to whether and how this was done would be useful.Several other aspects of their study might also benefit from additional clarity. For example, adherence of reporting to the ordered prestated hypotheses seems to have been modified. For example, the primary hypothesis stated in their introduction was that “preexisting cognitive impairment accounts for electroencephalogram burst-suppression during CPB.”1 It is curious, then, that the article’s title, and the subsequent analysis and reporting of the study, principally focuses on postoperative delirium as opposed to preexisting cognitive impairment. This is particularly notable because their power analysis states that the “primary objective of the study was to detect the difference in mean preoperative cognitive scores between the burst-suppression and no burst-suppression groups.”1 The current delirium analysis, as they state, was likely underpowered.Although there is a potentially important relationship between preexisting cognitive impairment and delirium, and one that could be plausibly mediated via EEG burst-suppression, the primary analysis reported should have been the relationship between baseline cognition and EEG burst suppression, with the delirium-related analyses being secondary, and/or exploratory, and fully adjusted for multiple comparisons. Indeed, although some mention is made of adjustments to reduce false discovery, it is not clear where and how these were done. Furthermore, as the authors stated that the “data and statistical analyses plans were defined and written after the data were accessed,”1 it is not clear how much data and analyses mining might have been undertaken before these complex analyses were settled on and which results were chosen to be reported. The study’s actual primary objective found that the relationship between preexisting cognition (assessed using the abbreviated Montreal cognitive assessment) and EEG burst-suppression was not statistically significant (P = 0.965 in their table 1).These limitations should not dissuade the reader from considering the potentially important relationships that the authors have described, because they may in fact be quite meaningful. However, without adequate adjustment for the unit of randomization, consideration for the analytical plan being developed after the data was accessed, and the subsequent organization of the results around a hypothesis that was not the primary one, it does raise the question as to whether undue emphasis is being placed on the “positive” results surrounding delirium, as opposed to the “negative” results related to baseline cognition.The author declares no competing interests.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
刚刚
LXL完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
N_wh完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
安静的棉花糖完成签到 ,获得积分10
1秒前
闾丘曼安完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
尼卡应助suy采纳,获得10
1秒前
1秒前
2秒前
思源应助xyz采纳,获得10
2秒前
2秒前
中华有为发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
3秒前
FashionBoy应助wwww采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
大方嵩发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
3秒前
4秒前
4秒前
猪猪发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
单薄白薇发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
豆子完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
通~发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
橘子哥完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
mnm发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
柔弱凡松发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
8秒前
9秒前
9秒前
9秒前
SHDeathlock发布了新的文献求助50
9秒前
乐乐应助hu970采纳,获得10
9秒前
单薄白薇完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
陈杰发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
11秒前
11秒前
小张张发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
乐乐应助YAN采纳,获得10
12秒前
迷惘墨香完成签到 ,获得积分10
13秒前
13秒前
高分求助中
Continuum Thermodynamics and Material Modelling 3000
Production Logging: Theoretical and Interpretive Elements 2700
Social media impact on athlete mental health: #RealityCheck 1020
Ensartinib (Ensacove) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer 1000
Unseen Mendieta: The Unpublished Works of Ana Mendieta 1000
Bacterial collagenases and their clinical applications 800
El viaje de una vida: Memorias de María Lecea 800
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 生物 医学 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 纳米技术 计算机科学 内科学 化学工程 复合材料 基因 遗传学 物理化学 催化作用 量子力学 光电子学 冶金
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3527742
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3107867
关于积分的说明 9286956
捐赠科研通 2805612
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1540026
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 716884
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 709762