Reassessment of a meta-analysis of intraoperative cerebral oximetry-based management studies
- 132 Downloads
To the Editor,
We read with interest the meta-analysis regarding intraoperative cerebral oximetry-based monitoring for maximizing perioperative outcomes by Zorrilla-Vaca et al.1 We note, however, some important discrepancies between the original source literature and the data that are used in the current analysis, which raise concerns. While conclusions regarding the primary outcome of cognitive impairment are not impacted, the means to reach that conclusion are at times not as accurate as they could be, and some of the secondary outcome conclusions differ in significance.
A primary example of discrepancy is in the studies used for the postoperative delirium outcome (Fig. 6). Of the six studies analyzed, three of them actually make no mention of “postoperative delirium”, “POD”, or “delirium” in the text or supplementary materials.2, 3, 4Nor is there any mention of instruments typically used to assess POD in patients, such as the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit...
Coreva Scientific is a private consultancy that has received fees from Medtronic Inc. for analyses of medical devices. Medtronic played no role in initiating or influencing the current submitted work.
Conflicts of interest
This submission was handled by Dr. Hilary P. Grocott, Editor-in-Chief, Canadian Journal of Anesthesia.