Table 2.
Overall in-hospital mortality. Data are collected for the last available observation when time of follow up is specified
| Overall mortality | REBOA | Control | Time/setting | OR adjusted/matched | Description of adjustment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Tot | % | n | Tot | % | ||||
| Aso 2017 [22] (REBOA vs RT) | 90 | 191 | 47 | 48 | 68 | 70.6 | Time frame not reported |
Hazard ratio = 0.94; 95%CI = 0.60–1.48§ OR 0.821; 95% CI 0.306–1.234 |
Adjusted propensity score |
| Brenner 2018 [23] (REBOA vs RT) | 75 | 83 | 90.3 | 197 | 202 | 97.5 | 24 h | OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.08–0.75 | None |
| Abe 2016 [21] (REBOA vs RT) | 405 | 636 | 63.7 | 210 | 267 | 78.7 |
Time frame not reported ED |
OR 0.261 95%CI 0.130–0.523 Pair-matched n = 304 |
Adjusted propensity score |
| DuBose 2016 [24] (REBOA vs RT) | 33 | 46 | 71.7 | 57 | 68 | 83.8 |
ED 24 h |
OR = 0.263; 95% CI = 0.043–1.609 | not reported (regression) |
| Moore 2015 [29] (REBOA vs RT) | 15 | 24 | 62.5 | 65 | 72 | 90.3 |
time frame not reported ED |
None | None |
| Matsumara 2017 (REBOA vs REBOA+RT) | 41 | 76 | 53.9 | 27 | 30 | 90.0 |
24 h 1 month At discharge |
None | None |
| Nori 2015* [31] (REBOA vs no-REBOA) | 259 | 351 | 73.8 | 709 | 1456 | 48.7 | Time frame not reported |
OR = 2.97; 95% CI = 2.29–3.84 Pairs matched 1:5 |
Adjusted propensity score |
| García 2020 [25] (REBOA vs no-REBOA) | 5 | 28 | 17.8 | 48 | 317 | 15.1 | Time frame not reported | OR = 0.20; 95%CI 0.05–0.77 | Adjusted propensity score |
| Inoue 2016* [26] (REBOA vs no-REBOA) | 386 | 625 | 61.7 | 283 | 625 | 45.3 |
Time frame not reported ED |
OR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.56–2.45 | Adjusted propensity score ° |
| Joseph 2019* [27] (REBOA vs no-REBOA) | 50 | 140 | 35.7 | 53 | 280 | 18.9 |
ED overall |
OR= 2.38; 95% CI= 1.51–3.76 | Adjusted propensity score |
| Yamamoto 2019* [30] (REBOA vs no-REBOA) | 64 | 117 | 54.7 | 79 | 117 | 67.5 | Time frame not reported | OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.34–0.99 | Adjusted propensity score |
§To be able to pool the adjusted odds ratios in a meta-analysis, the hazard ratio reported in the study by Aso et al. 2017 [22] was converted to an odds ratio. For the procedure, we assumed that the hazard ratio is a type of relative risk and, thus, is asymptotically similar to a relative risk. Then, using the inverse probability weighted binomial model we transformed the adjusted hazard ratio of mortality reported in the study by Aso to an odd ratio. Following this approach, we obtained an adjusted odds ratio of mortality (Aso: OR 0.821; 95% CI 0.306–1.234)
*Data were reported only for pairs
°Mortality was estimated via linear regression analysis, and time variables were estimated via bootstrapping