Selenium supplementation for critically ill adults

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Ir a:

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Selenium versus no selenium, Outcome 1 Mortality by duration (sodium selenite).

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Selenium versus no selenium, Outcome 2 Selenium mortality ICU and pancreatitis (sodium selenite).

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Selenium versus no selenium, Outcome 3 Mortality by duration (ebselen).

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Selenium versus no selenium, Outcome 1 Number of infected participants.

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Selenium versus no selenium, Outcome 1 Number of participants with adverse event.

Comparison 1. Selenium versus no selenium

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Mortality by duration (sodium selenite) Show forest plot	7	476	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.53, 1.06]

1.1 Selenium 28 day	5	364	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.71 [0.43, 1.17]
1.2 Selenium 90 day	2	112	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.87 [0.35, 2.14]
2 Selenium mortality ICU and pancreatitis (sodium selenite) Show forest plot	7	476	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.53, 1.06]

2.1 General intensive care patients	5	389	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.59, 0.96]
2.2 Acute pancreatitis	2	87	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.40 [0.01, 12.30]
3 Mortality by duration (ebselen) Show forest plot	3	693	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.83 [0.51, 1.35]

3.1 Ebselen 30 day	1	105	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.78 [0.53, 5.95]
3.2 Ebselen 3 month	2	588	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.72 [0.42, 1.22]

Comparison 1. Selenium versus no selenium

Comparison 2. Selenium versus no selenium

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Number of infected participants Show forest plot	6		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only

1.1 Selenium	3	337	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.22 [0.67, 2.23]
1.2 Ebselen	3	685	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.60 [0.36, 1.02]

Comparison 2. Selenium versus no selenium

Comparison 3. Selenium versus no selenium

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Number of participants with adverse event Show forest plot	5		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only

1.1 Selenium	3	328	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.40, 1.43]
1.2 Ebselen	2	588	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.16 [0.40, 3.36]

Comparison 3. Selenium versus no selenium