Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21086113›Full record

ReviewIntensive care medicine2011

Cardiogenic shock and nutrition: safe?

Ronan Thibault, Claude Pichard, Jan Wernerman, Karim Bendjelid

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Intensive care medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Ronan ThibaultNutrition Unit, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
Claude Pichard
Jan Wernerman
Karim Bendjelid
University Hospital of Geneva · CHHôpital Beau-Séjour · CHKarolinska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiogenic shock is a common diagnosis in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), and is characterized by a decreased cardiac output in the presence of adequate intravascular volume associated with an inadequate tissue perfusion including a physiological reduction in the splanchnic territory. It may occur in isolation as a reflection of cardiac pathology, or it may be part of a shock syndrome involving other pathogenic mechanisms. As the use of enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with an increase in mesenteric arterial output, EN could be deleterious by overwhelming the mechanisms of mesenteric adaptation. Accordingly, EN has been suspected to increase the risk of mesenteric ischaemia, bacterial translocation and sepsis in ICU patients with cardiogenic shock. International guidelines recommend a cautious use of EN within 72 h following cardiogenic shock. Recent evidence indicates that mesenteric arterial output may decrease during parenteral nutrition administration, suggesting that parenteral nutrition could have a protective effect on splanchnic organs in ICU patients with cardiogenic shock. Contrary to former beliefs, several meta-analyses have shown that parenteral nutrition is not associated with increased mortality. Exclusive EN is associated with negative energy balance and the combination of EN with supplemental parenteral nutrition during the first days following ICU admission has been proposed to prevent negative energy balance. Such a nutritional strategy could also be beneficial for the mesenteric circulation in cardiogenic shock, and consequently may improve the clinical outcome of patients with cardiogenic shock. Clinical trials are warranted to verify these hypotheses.

Indexed as

AnimalsCritical IllnessEnteral NutritionHemodynamicsHumansLiver CirculationMalnutritionNutritional SupportShock, CardiogenicSplanchnic Circulation

Identifiers

PMID21086113
OpenAlexW1979506064

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.