医学
早期目标导向治疗
感染性休克
复苏
败血症
急诊科
急诊医学
随机对照试验
重症监护医学
队列
相对风险
休克(循环)
心理干预
拯救脓毒症运动
内科学
严重败血症
置信区间
精神科
作者
Faraaz Shah,Victor B. Talisa,Chung-Chou H. Chang,Sofia Triantafyllou,Lu Tang,Florian Mayr,Alisa M. Higgins,Sandra Peake,Paul Mouncey,David A Harrison,Kimberley M. DeMerle,Jason Kennedy,Gregory F. Cooper,Rinaldo Bellomo,Kathy Rowan,Donald M. Yealy,Christopher Seymour,Derek C. Angus,Sachin Yende
标识
DOI:10.1097/ccm.0000000000006463
摘要
OBJECTIVES: The optimal approach for resuscitation in septic shock remains unclear despite multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our objective was to investigate whether previously uncharacterized variation across individuals in their response to resuscitation strategies may contribute to conflicting average treatment effects in prior RCTs. DESIGN: We randomly split study sites from the Australian Resuscitation of Sepsis Evaluation (ARISE) and Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock (ProCESS) trials into derivation and validation cohorts. We trained machine learning models to predict individual absolute risk differences (iARDs) in 90-day mortality in derivation cohorts and tested for heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) in validation cohorts and swapped these cohorts in sensitivity analyses. We fit the best-performing model in a combined dataset to explore roles of patient characteristics and individual components of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) to determine treatment responses. SETTING: Eighty-one sites in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Finland, Republic of Ireland, and the United States. PATIENTS: Adult patients presenting to the emergency department with severe sepsis or septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: EGDT vs. usual care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A local-linear random forest model performed best in predicting iARDs. In the validation cohort, HTE was confirmed, evidenced by an interaction between iARD prediction and treatment ( p < 0.001). When patients were grouped based on predicted iARDs, treatment response increased from the lowest to the highest quintiles (absolute risk difference [95% CI], –8% [–19% to 4%] and relative risk reduction, 1.34 [0.89–2.01] in quintile 1 suggesting harm from EGDT, and 12% [1–23%] and 0.64 [0.42–0.96] in quintile 5 suggesting benefit). Sensitivity analyses showed similar findings. Pre-intervention albumin contributed the most to HTE. Analyses of individual EGDT components were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment response to EGDT varied across patients in two multicenter RCTs with large benefits for some patients while others were harmed. Patient characteristics, including albumin, were most important in identifying HTE.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI