Evidence Hub

Smoking on the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lujia Zhang, Jiahuan Xu, Yue Li, Fanqi Meng, Wei J. Wang

Critical Care, 2024

36,995 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The relationship between smoking and the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been recognized, but the conclusions have been inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the association between smoking and ARDS risk in adults. METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for eligible studies published from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2023. We enrolled adult patients exhibiting clinical risk factors for ARDS and smoking condition. Outcomes were quantified using odds ratios (ORs) for binary variables and mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables, with a standard 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 26 observational studies involving 36,995 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed a significant association between smoking and an increased risk of ARDS (OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.33-2.08; P < 0.001). Further analysis revealed that the associations between patient-reported smoking history and ARDS occurrence were generally similar to the results of all the studies (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.38-2.28; P < 0.001). In contrast, patients identified through the detection of tobacco metabolites (cotinine, a metabolite of nicotine, and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), a metabolite of tobacco products) showed no significant difference in ARDS risk (OR 1.19; 95% CI 0.69-2.05; P = 0.53). The smoking group was younger than the control group (MD - 7.15; 95%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 36,995 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free