Mesenchymal stem cells microvesicles (MSC-MVs) stabilize endothelial barrier function in acute lung injury (ALI); however, the detailed mechanism remains to be further defined. Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), which is derived from MSC-MVs, might have a key role in the restoration of endothelial barrier function by MSC-MVs. MSCs with lentiviral vector-mediated HGF gene knockdown (siHGF-MSC) were generated. A co-culture model of pulmonary microvascular endothelial cells and MSC-MVs collected from MSCs or siHGF-MSCs after 24 h of hypoxic culture was utilized. Then, endothelial paracellular and transcellular permeabilities were detected. VE-cadherin, and occludin protein expression in the endothelial cells was measured using Western blot. Endothelial cell proliferation was analysed by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium (MTT) assay. Endothelial cell apoptosis was analysed using TUNEL assay. Finally, IL-6 and IL-10 production was determined via an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Treatment with MSC-MVs significantly decreased LPS-induced endothelial paracellular and transcellular permeabilities, and the effect was significantly inhibited after HGF gene knockdown in MSC-MVs. Furthermore, treatment with MSC-MVs increased the expression of the endothelial intercellular junction proteins VE-cadherin and occludin. Treatment with MSC-MVs also decreased endothelial apoptosis and induced endothelial cell proliferation. Finally, the treatment reduced IL-6 production and increased IL-10 production in the conditioned media of endothelial cells. However, the effects of the treatment with MSC-MVs were inhibited after HGF gene knockdown. MSC-MVs protect the barrier functions of pulmonary microvascular endothelial cells, which can be partly attributed to the presence of HGF in the MSC-MVs.

Purpose: Therapeutic hypothermia management remains controversial in patients with traumatic brain injury. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the risks and benefits of therapeutic hypothermia management in patients with traumatic brain injury. Methods: We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane (Central) and Clinical Trials databases from inception to January 17, 2019. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials that investigated therapeutic hypothermia management versus normothermia management in patients with traumatic brain injury. We collected the individual data of the patients from each included study. Meta-analyses were performed for 6-month mortality, unfavourable functional outcome and pneumonia morbidity. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: Twenty-three trials involving a total of 2796 patients were included. The randomised controlled trials with a high quality show significantly more mortality in the therapeutic hypothermia group [risk ratio (RR) 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.53, p = 0.02]. Lower mortality in the therapeutic hypothermia group occurred when therapeutic hypothermia was received within 24 h (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.96, p = 0.01), when hypothermia was received for treatment (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.88, p = 0.006) or when hypothermia was combined with post-craniectomy measures (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.00, p = 0.05). The risk of unfavourable functional outcome following therapeutic hypothermia management appeared to be significantly reduced (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91, p = 0.001). The meta-analysis suggested that there was a significant increase in the risk of pneumonia with therapeutic hypothermia management (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.97, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that therapeutic hypothermia did not reduce but might increase the mortality rate of patients with traumatic brain injury in some high-quality studies. However, traumatic brain injury patients with elevated intracranial hypertension could benefit from hypothermia in therapeutic management instead of prophylaxis when initiated within 24 h.

Background: The combination therapy of hydrocortisone, vitamin C, and thiamine has been proposed as a potential treatment in patients with sepsis and septic shock. However, subsequent trials have reported conflicting results in relation to survival outcomes. Hence, we performed this randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early combination therapy among adult patients with septic shock. Methods: This single-center, double-blind RCT enrolled adult patients with diagnosis of septic shock within 12 h from Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital between February 2019 and June 2021. Recruited patients were randomized 1:1 to receive intervention (hydrocortisone 200 mg daily, vitamin C 2 g every 6 h, and thiamine 200 mg every 12 h) or placebo (0.9% saline) for 5 days or until ICU discharge. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. The secondary endpoints included mortality at day 28, ICU discharge, and hospital discharge; shock reversal; 72-h Delta SOFA score; ICU-free days, vasopressor-free days, and ventilator support -free days up to day 28; ICU length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS. Results: Among 426 patients randomized, a total of 408 patients with septic shock were included in the per-protocol (PP) analysis, of which 203 were assigned to the intervention group and 205 to the placebo group. In the PP population, the primary outcome of 90-day mortality was 39.9% (81/203) and 39.0% (80/205) in the intervention and the placebo groups, respectively, and was not significantly different (P = 0.86). There was no significant difference between two groups in 28-day mortality (36.5% vs. 36.1%, P = 0.94) or the ICU mortality (31.5% vs. 28.8%, P = 0.55) and hospital mortality (34.5% vs. 33.2%, P = 0.78). No other secondary outcomes showed significant differences between two groups, including shock reversal, vasopressor-free days, and ICU LOS. Intention-to-treat analysis included all the 426 patients and confirmed these results (all P > 0.05). Conclusion: Among adult patients with septic shock, early use of hydrocortisone, vitamin C, and thiamine combination therapy compared with placebo did not confer survival benefits. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03872011, registration date: March 12, 2019. Graphic

Restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategies remain controversial in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the prognostic benefits of restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategies in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We identified randomized clinical trials through the 9th of December 2017 that investigated a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy versus a liberal transfusion strategy in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Individual patient data from each study were collected. Meta-analyses were performed for the primary and secondary outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. A trial sequential analysis (TSA)-adjusted random-effects model was used to pool the results from the included studies for the primary outcomes. Seven trials involving a total of 8886 patients were included. The TSA evaluations suggested that this meta-analysis could draw firm negative results, and the data were sufficient. There was no evidence that the risk of 30-day mortality differed between the patients assigned to a restrictive blood cell transfusion strategy and a liberal transfusion strategy (odds ratio (OR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.24; p = 0.87). Furthermore, the study suggested that the restrictive transfusion strategy was not associated with significant increases in pulmonary morbidity (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.34; p = 0.44), postoperative infection (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.3; p = 0.58), acute kidney injury (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.14; p = 0.71), acute myocardial infarction (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.27; p = 0.78), or cerebrovascular accidents (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.30; p = 0.66). Our meta-analysis demonstrates that the restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy was not inferior to the liberal strategy with respect to 30-day mortality, pulmonary morbidity, postoperative infection, cerebrovascular accidents, acute kidney injury, or acute myocardial infarction, and fewer red blood cells were transfused.

Small trials suggest that levosimendan is associated with a favorable outcome in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. However, recently published larger-scale trials did not provide evidence for a similar benefit from levosimendan. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the survival benefits of levosimendan in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and to investigate its effects in subgroups of patients with preoperative low-ejection fraction (EF). We identified randomized clinical trials through 20 April 2017 that investigated levosimendan therapy versus control in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Individual patient data from each study were compiled. Meta-analyses were performed for primary outcomes, secondary outcomes and serious adverse events, and subgroup analyses according to the preoperative EF of enrolled patients were also conducted. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Seventeen studies involving a total of 2756 patients were included. Levosimendan therapy was associated with a significant reduction in 30-day mortality (RR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.93; p = 0.02) and reduced the risk of death in single-center trials (RR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.79; p = 0.004) and in subgroup trials of inferior quality (RR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.92; p = 0.02); however, in multicenter and in high-quality subgroup-analysis trials, no significant difference in mortality was observed between patients who received levosimendan therapy and controls (p > 0.05). However, in high-quality subgroup trials, levosimendan therapy was associated with reduced mortality in patients in a preoperative low-EF subgroup (RR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.88; p = 0.01). Similarly, only patients in the preoperative low-EF subgroup benefited in terms of reduced risk of renal replacement therapy (RR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.85; p = 0.007). Furthermore, levosimendan therapy was associated with a significant reduction in intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (MDR −17.19; 95% CI, −34.43 to −2.94; p = 0.02). In patients undergoing cardiac surgery, the benefit of levosimendan in terms of survival was not shown in multicenter or in high-quality trials; however, levosimendan therapy was associated with reduced mortality in patients with preoperative ventricular systolic dysfunction.

BACKGROUND Sepsis-associated liver injury (SALI) refers to secondary liver function impairment caused by sepsis, patients with SALI often have worse clinical outcomes. The early identification and assessment of the occurrence and progression of SALI are pressing issues that urgently need to be resolved. AIM To investigate the relationship between iron metabolism and SALI. METHODS In this prospective study, 139 patients were recruited, with 53 assigned to the SALI group. The relationships between SALI and various iron metabolism-related biomarkers were examined. These biomarkers included serum iron (SI), total iron-binding capacity (TIBC), serum ferritin, transferrin, and transferrin saturation. To identify independent risk factors for SALI, both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was utilized to assess the predictive value of these biomarkers for the occurrence of SALI. RESULTS There were no statistically significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (excluding liver function), or APACHE II scores between the two groups of patients. Compared with the sepsis group, the SALI group presented significantly higher SI (P < 0.001), TIBC (P < 0.001), serum ferritin (P = 0.001), transferrin (P = 0.005), and transferrin saturation levels (P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that SI (odds ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.40, P < 0.001) and TIBC levels (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.21, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of SALI. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that SI and TIBC had areas under the curve of 0.816 and 0.757, respectively, indicating moderate predictive accuracy for SALI. CONCLUSION Iron metabolism disorders are closely associated with the development of SALI, and SI and TIBC may serve as potential predictive biomarkers. The combined use of SI and TIBC has superior diagnostic efficacy for SALI. These findings provide valuable insights for the early identification and management of SALI among patients with sepsis.