ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2016
Predictors of Acute Hemodynamic Decompensation in Early Sepsis: An Observational Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers of Airway Disease, Barrett's and Underdiagnosed Reflux Noninvasively (BAD-BURN) in World Trade Center exposed firefighters: a case-control observational study protocol.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Biomarkers of Airway Disease, Barrett's and Underdiagnosed Reflux Noninvasively (BAD-BURN): a Case-Control Observational Study Protocol.Research square · 2024Article
- Ventriculo-arterial (un)coupling in septic shock: Impact of current and upcoming hemodynamic drugs.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Sepsis: A Review of Advances in Management.Advances in therapy · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe study of sepsis is hindered by its heterogeneous time course and evolution. A subgroup of patients with severe sepsis develops shock soon after the initiation of treatment while others present hypotensive. We sought to determine the incidence of hypotension after the initiation of treatment for sepsis, and characterize their clinical features and course.
methodsA retrospective review of electronic medical record of all septic patients (n = 542) that met the definition of septic shock within 24 hours of admission (2011 - 2012) at an urban Veteran Affairs Hospital was performed. Subjects either had 1) initial normotension (INT) with hypotension developing within 24 hours or 2) initial hypotension (IH). Logistic regression was used to model associated factors of INT/IH.
resultsINT occurred in 62 patients (11%) with average initial blood pressure of 120/71 mm Hg and developed hypotension to 79/48 mm Hg. IH was identified in 52 patients (10%) with average presenting blood pressure of 81/46 mm Hg. INT showed evidence of increased sympathetic tone with significantly higher heart rate, blood pressure and temperature. INT patients were younger, more frequently on alpha-blockers, and more likely septic from pneumonia compared to IH patients. INT and IH patients had similar timing of antibiotic initiation, amount of 24-hour fluid resuscitation, vasopressor use, organ dysfunction and mortality at 28 days. Using alpha-blockers, being Caucasian, and having higher temperatures were independent predictors of INT.
conclusionINT is a distinctive presentation of septic shock characterized by rapid deterioration during early treatment. By further studying this subgroup, mediators of septic shock may be identified that clarify pathophysiology and provide timely targeted treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.