The effect of mild induced hypothermia on outcomes of patients after cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Table 2 Summary of findings for the main comparison

MIH compared to control for cardiac arrest patients
Setting:
Intervention: MIH
Comparison: Control
Patient or population: cardiac arrest patients
Setting:
Intervention: MIH
Comparison: Control
Outcomes	Anticipated absolute effects^a (95 % CI)		Relative effect (95 % CI)	No. of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
Outcomes	Risk with control	Risk with MIH	Relative effect (95 % CI)	No. of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
Mortality (follow-up 180 days or hospital discharge)	Study population		RR 0.94 (0.84 to 1.04)	1363 (5 RCTs)	⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW^{b c d}
	510 per 1000	480 per 1000 (429 to 531)
	Moderate
	551 per 1000	518 per 1000 (463 to 573)
Neurological outcome (follow-up 180 days or hospital discharge)	Study population		RR 0.83 (0.68 to 1.01)	1409 (6 RCTs)	⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW^{b c d}
	569 per 1000	472 per 1000 (387 to 575)
	Moderate
	671 per 1000	557 per 1000 (456 to 677)

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence: high quality—we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect; moderate quality—we are moderately confident in the effect estimate (the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different); low quality—our confidence in the effect estimate is limited (the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect); very low quality—we have very little confidence in the effect estimate (the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect).
^aThe risk in the intervention group (and its 95 % CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95 % CI)
^bAll trials were with substantial risk of bias
^cOne trial accounted for the largest part among all the trials and probably contributed to the heterogeneity
^dOne trial included only less than 8 % of the screened patients. One trial included only cardiac arrest patients with pulseless electrical activity and asystole
CI Confidence interval, MIH Mild induced hypothermia, RCT Randomised controlled trial, RR Risk ratio

ISSN: 1364-8535