We have located links that may give you full text access.
Effect of intravenous immunoglobulin on the outcome of children with septic shock in a PICU: a retrospective cohort study.
European Journal of Pediatrics 2023 September 22
UNLABELLED: The therapeutic efficacy of intravenous immuneglobulin (IVIG) on children with septic shock remains uncertain. Therefore, we endeavored to investigate the impact of administering intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) on patient with septic shock. We retrospectively analyzed the data of children admitted to the PICU due to septic shock from January 2017 to December 2021 in a tertiary pediatric hospital. The main outcome was in-hospital mortality. Total 304 patients were enrolled. There were no significant differences in the PRISM-III score (11 vs. 12, P = 0.907), PIM-3 score (0.08 vs. 0.07, P = 0.544), pSOFA score (10 vs. 10, P = 0.852) between the No IVIG group and the IVIG group. Children who received IVIG required more continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) support (43% vs. 24%, P = 0.001) and longer duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) (6 vs. 3 days, P = 0.002), and longer length of stay (LOS) of PICU (7 vs. 4 days, P = 0.001) and LOS of hospital (18 vs. 11 days, P = 0.001) than children who did not receive. The 28-day survival analysis (P = 0.033) showed better survival rates in IVIG group, while the in-hospital mortality (43% vs. 52%, P = 0.136) was no significant difference. In the propensity score matched analysis, 71 pairs were established. The length of CRRT (2 vs. 3 days, P = 0.744), duration of mechanical ventilation (5 vs. 4 days, P = 0.402), LOS of PICU (7 vs. 5 days, P = 0.216), LOS of hospital (18 vs. 13 days, P = 0.290), in-hospital mortality (44% vs. 44%, P = 1.000) and 28-day survival analysis (P = 0.748) were not statistically different. After inverse probability weighted analysis, there was still no difference in mortality between the two groups (51% vs. 48%, P = 0.665).
CONCLUSION: In children with septic shock, the use of intravenous immunoglobulin as an adjuvant therapy does not reduce in-hospital mortality.
WHAT IS KNOWN: • Guidelines suggest against the routine use of intravenous immuneglobulin in children with septic shock. Some small observational studies have reported conflicting result.
WHAT IS NEW: • The use of intravenous immunoglobulin as an adjuvant therapy does not reduce in-hospital mortality in children with septic shock.
CONCLUSION: In children with septic shock, the use of intravenous immunoglobulin as an adjuvant therapy does not reduce in-hospital mortality.
WHAT IS KNOWN: • Guidelines suggest against the routine use of intravenous immuneglobulin in children with septic shock. Some small observational studies have reported conflicting result.
WHAT IS NEW: • The use of intravenous immunoglobulin as an adjuvant therapy does not reduce in-hospital mortality in children with septic shock.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Restrictive or Liberal Transfusion Strategy in Myocardial Infarction and Anemia.New England Journal of Medicine 2023 November 12
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app