4.6 Review

Hypomagnesemia and mortality in patients admitted to intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

QJM-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
卷 109, 期 7, 页码 453-459

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/qjmed/hcw048

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Reports of mortality due to magnesium dysregulation in the critical care setting are controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between hypomagnesemia and mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Methods: Eligible studies assessing the association between hypomagnesemia or hypermagnesemia and mortality in the critical care setting were comprehensively searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE from their inception to September 2015. Inclusion criteria were published observational studies in adults who were admitted to the intensive or critical care setting with initial serum magnesium measurement. We used the definition of abnormal magnesium level defined by each study. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We performed meta-analysis using random-effects model and calculated pooled effect estimate of outcome comparing between hypomagnesemia and normal magnesium category. Results: From 30 full-text articles, 6 studies involving 1550 participants were included in the meta-analysis. There was a statistically significant higher risk of mortality in critically ill patients who had hypomagnesemia with RR of 1.90 (95% CI: 1.48-2.44, P < 0.001, I-2 = 63.5%). Risk for needing mechanical ventilation was also higher in the hypomagnesemia group with RR of 1.65 (95% CI: 1.12-2.43, P = 0.01, I-2 = 84%). Length of ICU stay was also higher in the hypomagnesemia group with mean difference of 4.1 days (95% CI: 1.16-7.04, P = 0.01). Conclusion: The findings of this meta-analysis indicate hypomagnesemia is associated with higher mortality, the need of mechanical ventilation and also the length of ICU stay in patients admitted to ICU.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据