Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18254048›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008

Human recombinant activated protein C for severe sepsis.

A Martí-Carvajal, G Salanti, A F Cardona

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Therapeutic targeting of NOD1 receptors.British journal of pharmacology · 2013
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Pneumonia in adults: the practical emergency department perspective.Emergency medicine clinics of North America · 2012
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. An update on activated protein C (xigris) in the management of sepsis.P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management · 2010
    Article
  14. Adjunct therapy for sepsis: how early?Current infectious disease reports · 2010
    Article
  15. Activated protein C action in inflammation.British journal of haematology · 2010
    Review
  16. Blood coagulation disorders in septic patients.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2010
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Current status of minimally invasive necrosectomy for post-inflammatory pancreatic necrosis.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2009
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

A Martí-CarvajalUniversidad de Carabobo, Departamento de Salud Pública, Centro Colaborador Venezolano de la Red Cochrane Iberoamericana, Valencia, Edo. Carabobo, Venezuela, 2001. amarti@uc.edu.ve
G Salanti
A F Cardona
Instituto Nacional de Cancerología · COUniversity of Carabobo · VEUniversity of Ioannina · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis is a common, expensive and frequently fatal condition. There is an urgent need for developing new therapies to further reduce severe sepsis-induced mortality. One of those approaches is the use of human recombinant activated protein C (APC).

objectivesWe assessed the clinical effectiveness of APC for the treatment of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1966 to 2005); EMBASE (1980 to 2005) and LILACS (1982 to 2005). We contacted researchers and organizations working in the field. We did not have any language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of APC for severe sepsis in adults and children. We excluded studies on neonates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently performed study selection, quality assessment and data extraction. We estimated relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We measured statistical heterogeneity using I-squared (I(2)). We used a random-effects model. MAIN

resultsWe included four studies involving 4911 participants (4434 adults and 477 paediatric patients). For 28-day mortality, APC did not reduce the risk of death in adult participants with severe sepsis (pooled RR 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.18; P = 0.50, I(2) = 72%). The effectiveness of APC did not seem to be associated with the degree of severity of sepsis (two studies): for an APACHE II score less than 25 the RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.21; P = 0.70), and in participants with an APACHE II score of 25 or more the RR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.49; P = 0.68). APC use was, however, associated with a higher risk of bleeding (RR 1.48 (95% CI 1.07 to 2.06; P = 0.02, I(2) = 8%). Two studies were stopped early because there was little chance of reaching the efficacy endpoint by completion of the trial. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis updated review found no evidence suggesting that APC should be used for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Additionally, APC seems to be associated with a higher risk of bleeding. Unless additional RCTs provide evidence of a treatment effect, policy-makers, clinicians and academics should not promote the use of APC.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsChildHospital MortalityHumansProtein CRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecombinant ProteinsSepsisShock, SepticProtein CRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID18254048
OpenAlexW4211150391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.