Meta-analysis of effectiveness and safety of temperature-controlled therapy in patients with severe traumatic brain injury
10.3760/cma.j.cn501098-20250529-00307
- VernacularTitle:体温控制疗法对重型创伤性脑损伤患者有效性及安全性的Meta分析
- Author:
Mengsha NIE
1
;
Bo FENG
;
Yue LU
;
Qiongyu WU
;
Minxiao LI
;
Xiaogang CHEN
;
Yuzhen ZHANG
;
Liming CHENG
Author Information
1. 昆明市儿童医院麻醉科，昆明 650100
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Brain injuries;
Hypothermia, induced;
Body temperature regulation;
Meta-analysis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Trauma
2025;41(10):975-986
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic temperature control in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI).Methods:The full-text databases of Chinese Medical Journal, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, VIP Database, China Biomedical Database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of hypothermia treatment and conventional treatment in patients with sTBI. The search period was from January 2016 to June 2025. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. The evaluation indicators included intracranial pressure before treatment, at 3 and 5 days after treatment, favorable prognosis rate and mortality rate within 6 months after treatment, and incidence of pulmonary infection, intracranial infection, epilepsy, acute gastrointestinal dysfunction, deep vein thrombosis, abnormal coagulation function, and arrhythmia during treatment; publication bias.Results:A total of 33 studies involving 3 322 patients were included, with 1 696 patients in the temperature treatment group and 1 626 in the conventional treatment group. There was no statistically significant difference in intracranial pressure between the two groups before treatment ( SMD=0, 95% CI -0.13, 0.14, P>0.05). However, at 3 and 5 days after treatment, the intracranial pressure was lower in the temperature treatment group than that in the conventional treatment group ( SMD=-2.29, 95% CI -2.76, -1.82, P<0.01; SMD=-2.66, 95% CI -3.43, -1.89, P<0.01). Within 6 months after treatment, the favorable prognosis rate was higher in the temperature treatment group than that in the conventional treatment group ( RR=1.41, 95% CI 1.32, 1.50, P<0.01), and mortality rate was lower than that in the conventional treatment group ( RR=0.64, 95% CI 0.55, 0.75, P<0.01). Compared with the conventional treatment group, the incidences of epilepsy and acute gastrointestinal dysfunction in the temperature treatment group were statistically reduced ( RR=0.33, 95% CI 0.13, 0.83, P<0.05; RR=0.43, 95% CI 0.25, 0.74, P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of pulmonary infection ( RR=0.96, 95% CI 0.85, 1.08, P>0.05), intracranial infection ( RR=0.56, 95% CI 0.20, 1.56, P>0.05), deep vein thrombosis ( RR=0.93, 95% CI 0.69, 1.25, P>0.05), abnormal coagulation function ( RR=1.19, 95% CI 0.43, 3.31, P>0.05) or arrhythmia ( RR=0.51, 95% CI 0.23, 1.12, P>0.05) between the two groups. Egger′s test indicated the presence of publication bias and the results remained robust after trim and fill analysis. Conclusions:For patients with sTBI, temperature control therapy shows lowered intracranial pressure and mortality rate as well as improved favorable prognosis rate at 6 months posttreatment, and decreased incidence of epilepsy and acute gastrointestinal dysfunction during treatment, while reveals similar incidence of pulmonary infection, intracranial infection, deep vein thrombosis, abnormal coagulation function, and arrhythmia when compared with conventional treatment.
