Impact of Adjuvant Use of Midodrine to Intravenous Vasopressors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Table 2
Demographics of participants of the included trials.
Study
Number
Age (SD)
Male (%)
(Mean ± SD) APACHE score
Corticosteroids administration
Liu, 2010
Midodrine
20
—
—
—
17 (85)
Control
20
—
—
—
5 (25)
Poveromo, 2016
Midodrine
94
64.3 ± 15
64 (68.1)
61.3 ± 7.9 (APACHE 4)
52 (55.3)
Control
94
65.9 ± 15.5
59 (62.8)
82 (66–93) (APACHE 4)
38 (40.4)
Whitson, 2016
Midodrine
135
69.3 ± 16
64 (47)
82.6 ± 26.4 (APACHE 4)
35 (26)
Control
140
65 ± 19
79 (56)
84.3 ± 26.8 (APACHE 4)
40 (28.6)
Roach, 2017
Midodrine
158
—
—
84 (APACHE 3)
—
Control
474
—
—
77 (APACHE 3)
—
Fiorenza, 2019
Midodrine
51
—
—
—
—
Control
51
—
—
—
—
Nadhim, 2019
Midodrine
41
—
—
—
—
Control
42
—
—
—
—
Hailu, 2020
Midodrine
83
—
—
—
—
Control
83
—
—
—
—
Tremblay, 2020
Midodrine
74
68.3 ± 9.8
45 (60.8)
—
—
Control
74
65.4 ± 11.5
47 (63.5)
—
—
Santer, 2020 (MIDAS)
Midodrine
66
70.0 ± 19.1
36 (54.4)
14.7 ± 7.9 (APACHE II)
—
Control (placebo)
66
66.7 ± 22.3
32 (48.5)
14.8 ± 8.9 (APACHE II)
—
APACHE: acute physiology and chronic health evaluation; MIDAS: effect of midodrine versus placebo on time to vasopressors discontinuation in patients with persistent hypotension in the intensive care unit; SD: standard deviation.
