Skip to main content

Table 2 Pair-wise and network estimates of the effects of different treatments compared with CST on mortality and MODS rate

From: Minimally invasive drainage versus open surgical debridement in SAP/SMAP – a network meta-analysis

  Comparisons Risk Ratio (95% CI) Risk Ratio (95% CrI) P for inconsistencya
Pair-wise meta-analysis I2 Network meta-analysis I2
Mortality
 Comparison 1
  MID 6 0.50 (0.21, 0.81) 19.9% 0.36 (0.16, 0.64) 24.1%
  OSD 1 0.95 (0.60, 1.52) 0.0% 0.56 (0.22, 1.30) 0.0% 0.605
 Comparison 2
  EMID 4 0.53 (0.32, 0.88) 0.0% 0.43 (0.21, 0.78) 0.0% 0.598
  LMID 2 0.25 (0.03, 2.22) 66.2% 0.19 (0.06, 0.47) 24.4% 0.842
  EOSD 0 0.55 (0.12, 2.50)
  LOSD 1 0.57 (0.11, 2.87) 0.0% 0.43 (0.16, 1.10) 0.0% 0.879
 Comparison 3
  ESD 2 0.37 (0.10, 1.34) 0.0% 0.24 (0.02, 2.90) 0.0%
  PCD 2 0.28 (0.02, 3.98) 86.6% 0.23 (0.01, 1.80) 86.8%
  MIS 2 0.48 (0.24, 0.93) 0.0% 0.42 (0.04, 4.20) 0.0%
MODS rate
 Comparison 1
  MID 2 0.40 (0.08, 1.98) 78.4% 0.29 (0.02, 1.30) 76.7%
  OSD 0 0.85 (0.04, 5.70)
 Comparison 2
  EMID 1 0.62 (0.26, 1.48) 0.0% 0.43 (0.20, 0.76) 0.0%
  LMID 1 Can not be calculated 0.18 (0.06,0.46)
  EOSD 0 0.57 (0.11, 2.70)
  LOSD 0 0.44 (0.16, 1.10)
 Comparison 3
  ESD 0   
  PCD 1 Can not be calculated 3.70−12 (9.70−32, 0.06)
  MIS 1 0.62 (0.26, 1.48) 0.0% 0.56 (0.03, 1.10) 0.0%
  1. a Node-splitting analysis of inconsistency