Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Dear Editor,
We read the recent article written by Rochwerg et al. in Intensive Care Medicine and greatly appreciate their efforts to assess the effect of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in a systematic review and meta-analysis [1]. Nevertheless, some issues should be further discussed.
First, it is obvious that I2 = 0 in Fig. 3, why not apply the fixed effect model in meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) [2, 3]? Second, they only performed TSA on invasive mechanical ventilation outcome and mortality outcome. But another major positive outcome of escalation of therapy was not evaluated by TSA. Third, \({\text{The}}\,{\text{relative}}\,{\text{risk}}\,{\text{reduction}}\) = \(\frac{{{\text{Incidence}}\,{\text{in}}\,{\text{control}}\,{\text{arm}}{-}{\text{incidence}}\,{\text{in}}\,{\text{intervention}}\,{\text{arm}}}}{{{\text{Incidence}}\,{\text{in}}\,{\text{control}}\,{\text{arm}}}}\) [4]. Therefore, the relative risk reduction of invasive mechanical ventilation outcome should be 16.58% \(\left( {\frac{{\frac{235}{805} - \frac{205}{842}}}{{\frac{235}{805}}}} \right)\), not 15%. While, the relative risk reduction of mortality outcome should be 4.60% \(\left( {\frac{{\frac{186}{685} - \frac{187}{722}}}{{\frac{186}{685}}}} \right)\), not 15%, too. Therefore, they cannot apply the same relative risk reduction (15%) to TSA of different outcomes. In addition, boundary required information size (RIS) on mortality outcome is ignored by Trial Sequential Analysis v.0.9.5.10 Beta due to little information used (0.92%). Therefore, TSA of mortality outcome cannot be drawn on principle.
Abbreviations
- HFNC:
-
High flow nasal cannula
- TSA:
-
Trial sequential analysis
- RIS:
-
Required information size
References
Rochwerg B, Granton D, Wang DX, Helviz Y, Einav S, Frat JP, Mekontso-Dessap A, Schreiber A, Azoulay E, Mercat A, Demoule A, Lemiale V, Pesenti A, Riviello ED, Mauri T, Mancebo J, Brochard L, Burns K (2019) High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute ypoxemicrespiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 45(5):563–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-019-05590-5
Higgins JP, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration
Barbateskovic M, Marker S, Granholm A, Anthon CT, Krag M, Jakobsen JC, Perner A, Wetterslev J, Moller MH (2019) Stress ulcer prophylaxis with proton pump inhibitors or histamin-2 receptor antagonists in adult intensive care patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Intensive Care Med 45:143–158
Schoenfeld P (2004) Evidence based medicine (EBM) in practice: applying relative risk and relative risk reduction. Am J Gastroenterol 99:2084–2085
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Dr. Hui-zi Li for his statistical support for the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Luo, MS., Huang, GJ. & Wu, L. High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Intensive Care Med 45, 1167–1168 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-019-05652-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-019-05652-8