Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18638356›Full record

ReviewCritical care (London, England)2008

Bench-to-bedside review: latest results in hemorrhagic shock.

Martin K Angele, Christian P Schneider, Irshad H Chaudry

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Critical care (London, England), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The HFrontiers in immunology · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Martin K AngeleDepartment of Surgery, Klinikum Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Marchionistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany.
Christian P Schneider
Irshad H Chaudry
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

IMMUNOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF HEMORRHAGER01GM037127 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI CHAUDRY, IRSHAD H · 1988 to 2010
$5.0M
MAINTENANCE OF ORGAN FUNCTION FOLLOWING INJURYR37GM039519 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI CHAUDRY, IRSHAD H · 1999 to 2008
$3.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM037127NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM37127NIGMS NIH HHS R37 GM039519NIGMS NIH HHS R37 GM39519
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hemorrhagic shock is a leading cause of death in trauma patients worldwide. Bleeding control, maintenance of tissue oxygenation with fluid resuscitation, coagulation support, and maintenance of normothermia remain mainstays of therapy for patients with hemorrhagic shock. Although now widely practised as standard in the USA and Europe, shock resuscitation strategies involving blood replacement and fluid volume loading to regain tissue perfusion and oxygenation vary between trauma centers; the primary cause of this is the scarcity of published evidence and lack of randomized controlled clinical trials. Despite enormous efforts to improve outcomes after severe hemorrhage, novel strategies based on experimental data have not resulted in profound changes in treatment philosophy. Recent clinical and experimental studies indicated the important influences of sex and genetics on pathophysiological mechanisms after hemorrhage. Those findings might provide one explanation why several promising experimental approaches have failed in the clinical arena. In this respect, more clinically relevant animal models should be used to investigate pathophysiology and novel treatment approaches. This review points out new therapeutic strategies, namely immunomodulation, cardiovascular maintenance, small volume resuscitation, and so on, that have been introduced in clinics or are in the process of being transferred from bench to bedside. Control of hemorrhage in the earliest phases of care, recognition and monitoring of individual risk factors, and therapeutic modulation of the inflammatory immune response will probably constitute the next generation of therapy in hemorrhagic shock. Further randomized controlled multicenter clinical trials are needed that utilize standardized criteria for enrolling patients, but existing ethical requirements must be maintained.

Indexed as

HumansPoint-of-Care SystemsResearch DesignShock, Hemorrhagic

Identifiers

PMID18638356
PMCPMC2575549
OpenAlexW1985454477

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.