Login
Site Search
Subscribe
Modify
Home >
List Archives
[ccm-l] SAFE TBI in today's NEJM
Ian Seppelt SeppelI at wahs.nsw.gov.auThu Aug 30 05:11:53 BST 2007
- Previous message: SAFE TBI in today's NEJM
- Next message: [ccm-l] SAFE TBI in today's NEJM
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
That's not right, Farhad, it's a prospective 24 month followup of a subgroup of the original SAFE cohort. It was certainly not a planned analysis when SAFE was originally designed [you will recall that the primary end point was 28 day mortality] but when the difference in outcomes in the (prospectively determined) trauma group became apparent in SAFE at 28 days this was planned. 24 months was chosen, as the first patients in SAFE were approaching 24 months at the time the decision was made to do this. So it is still a prospective outcome evaluation of two groups in an RCT. The SAFE investigators are currently doing a genuine post hoc analysis of these patients in more detail, to try to work out the 'WHY' - in particular to be sure there are not important difference between groups that were not detected in the initial SAFE dataset [remember that SAFE was stratified for trauma, but not for TBI per se]. Even if you accept that some as yet unrecognised bias led to an overstatement of the difference between the groups, I think it is implausible that accounting for that bias will totally neutralise such a large difference. SAFE was designed as a mortality study. The TBI followup looked at both mortality, and functional neurological outcomes (GOSE, done properly, prospectively, by a blinded trained assessor). And yes, it obviously DID have the power, as it detected a significant difference with p = 0.007 I don't think I have overstated the case. Cheers, Ian Ian Seppelt FANZCA FJFICM Senior Staff Specialist Dept of Intensive Care Medicine The Nepean Hospital, PO Box 63 Penrith NSW 2751 Director of Clinical Research, Sydney West AHS Clinical Lecturer, University of Sydney >>> "Farhad N Kapadia" <fnkapadia at gmail.com> 30/08/2007 1:33pm >>> Today's NEJM has the 2 year followup of the traumatic brain injury > cohort from SAFE which clearly shows worse outcomes in the albumin > group. Based on this it is reasonable to say that albumin is absolutely > contraindicated in TBI, Ian, Isn't it possible that you are overstating the case. Your statement is based on a finding of a subgroup post hoc analysis which almost certainly does not have to power to evaluate mortality. farhad -- Dr. Farhad Kapadia MD FRCP Consultant Physician & Intensivist Mumbai, India
- Previous message: SAFE TBI in today's NEJM
- Next message: [ccm-l] SAFE TBI in today's NEJM
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the trauma-list mailing list
