In the original article, there was a mistake in Figure 2, Supplemental Figures 40-41, 43, 45-46 and Table 2 as published. For Figure 2, we mistakenly adopted the fixed effect model, resulting in the difference between the picture and the actual results. In practice, we need to use the random-effect model to calculate the effect quantity and its 95% CIs, which is the most reasonable. In both the method part and the result part, we describe the calculation using the random effect model. For Supplemental Figures 40-41, 43, 45-46 and Table 2, as we reworked all the figures, we made mistakes in uploading in the revised manuscript. The corrected Figure 2, Supplemental Figures 40-41, 43, 45-46 and Table 2 appear below.
Figure 2
Table 2
| Pooled results | No. of Patients (No. of Studies) | Relative Effect, RR, or MD (95% CI) | Heterogeneity I2,% | Absolute effect (95%CI) | Evidence rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary outcomes | |||||
| 28 d mortality | 10,612 (40) | 0.94 (0.87, 1.02) | 24 | 17 fewer per 1000 (from 37 fewer to 6 more) | Moderate1 |
| In-hospital mortality | 8049 (23) | 0.90 (0.82, 0.99) | 39 | 33 fewer per 1000 (from 3 fewer to 60 fewer) | Moderate1 |
| ICU mortality | 7,152 (17) | 0.90 (0.83,0.97) | 7 | 28 fewer per 1000 (from 9 fewer to 48 fewer) | High |
| Secondary outcomes | |||||
| Long-term mortality | 6,254 (9) | 0.96 (0.88, 1.05) | 54 | 24 fewer per 1000 (from 48 fewer to 20 more) | Low2,3 |
| Shock reversal at 7 d | 6,738 (16) | 1.16 (1.06,1.27) | 72 | 105 more per 1000 (from 39 more to 178 more) | Moderate2 |
| Shock reversal at 28 d | 2,526 (12) | 1.07 (1.01,1.13) | 12 | 48 more per 1000 (from 7 fewer to 89 more) | Moderate2 |
| Gastroduodenal bleeding | 5,128 (24) | 1.07 (0.85,1.36) | 0 | 3 more per 1000 (from 7 fewer to 17 more) | High |
| Superinfection | 5,375 (24) | 1.06 (0.92, 1.22) | 13% | 10 more per 1000 (from 13 fewer to 36 more) | Moderate2 |
| Hypernatremia | 4,569 (3) | 1.51 (1.10,2.07) | 0 | 12 more per 1000 (from 2 more to 24 more) | Moderate2 |
| Hyperglycemia | 8,787 (20) | 1.19 (1.10,1.29) | 49% | 49 more per 1000 (from 24 more to 76 more) | High |
| Vasopressor-free days | 1,316 (2) | 1.93 (0.76, 3.09) | 0 | 1.93 more per 1000 (from 0.76 more to 3.09 more) | Moderate2 |
| Ventilation-free days | 1,812 (4) | 1.46 (0.27, 2.65) | 21 | 1.46 more per 1000 (from 0.27 more to 2.65 more) | Moderate2 |
| Length of stay in hospital | 8,383 (19) | -1.38(-2.28, -0.49) | 5 | 1.38 fewer per 1000 (from 2.28fewer to 0.49 fewer) | High |
| Length of stay in ICU | 8,166 (22) | -0.89 (-1.80, 0.03) | 47 | 0.89 fewer per 1000 (from 1.8 fewer to 0.03 more) | High |
| Time to resolution of shock | 4,091 (5) | -1.35(-1.79, -0.92) | 68 | 1.35 fewer per 1000 (from 1.79 fewer to 0.92 fewer) | Low2,3 |
| SOFA score at day 7 | 3,076 (13) | -0.90 (-1.72, -0.09) | 93 | 0.9 fewer per 1000 (from 1.72 fewer to 0.08 fewer) | Low2,3 |
The findings and evidence rank of the included studies in patients with sepsis.
RR, risk ratio; MD, mean difference; ICU, intensive care unit.
1Inconsistencies. 2Imprecisions. 3Risk of bias.
In the original article, there was an error. As the outcomes for Hypernatremia, Hyperglycemia and SOFA at day 7 were revised several times, and the pooled effects were not changed, but the up or low 95% CI had a little change. When we modified, we ignored the modifications in the two places.
A correction has been made to RESULTS, Secondary Outcomes of RESULTS, Paragraph 1:
“Supplementary Figures 10–22present the assessment of the secondary outcomes. Corticosteroids achieved a small reduction in length of stay in hospital (MD, −1.38; 95% CI, −2.28 to −0.49; I2 = 5%; evidence rank, high), SOFA scores at day 7 (MD, −0.90; 95% CI, −1.72 to −0.09; I2 = 93%; evidence rank, low), and time to resolution of shock (MD, −1.35; 95% CI, −1.79 to −0.92; I2 = 68%; evidence rank, low) for patients with sepsis. Conversely, corticosteroids resulted in higher risk of hypernatremia (RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10–2.07; I2 = 0%; evidence rank, moderate) and hyperglycemia (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.10–1.29; I2 = 49%; evidence rank, high).”
The authors apologize for these errors and state that they do not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher’s Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2021.771779/full#supplementary-material
Summary
Keywords
corticosteroids, sepsis, mortality, systematic review, meta-analysis
Citation
Liang H, Song H, Zhai R, Song G, Li H, Ding X, Kan Q and Sun T (2021) Corrigendum: Corticosteroids for Treating Sepsis in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Immunol. 12:771779. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.771779
Received
07 September 2021
Accepted
25 October 2021
Published
05 November 2021
Volume
12 - 2021
Edited and reviewed by
Pietro Ghezzi, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, United Kingdom
Updates
Copyright
© 2021 Liang, Song, Zhai, Song, Li, Ding, Kan and Sun.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Tongwen Sun, suntongwen@163.com; Quancheng Kan, kanquancheng@126.com
†These authors have contributed equally to this work
This article was submitted to Inflammation, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.