Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27576362›Full record

SynthesisActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2016

Scandinavian SSAI clinical practice guideline on choice of first-line vasopressor for patients with acute circulatory failure.

M H Møller, C Claudius, E Junttila, M Haney, A Oscarsson-Tibblin, A Haavind, A Perner

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. The Use of Metaraminol as a Vasopressor in Critically Unwell Patients: A Narrative Review and a Survey of UK Practice.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Basic Critical Care for Management of COVID-19 Patients: Position Paper of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, Part II.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2020
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

M H MøllerDepartment of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. mortenhylander@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6378-9673
C ClaudiusDepartment of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark.
E JunttilaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
M HaneyAnaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4049-8910
A Oscarsson-TibblinDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Department of Medicine and Health, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
A HaavindDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital Northern Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
A PernerDepartment of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark.
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKLinköping University · SETampere University Hospital · FIUmeå University · SEUniversity Hospital of North Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdult critically ill patients often suffer from acute circulatory failure, necessitating use of vasopressor therapy. The aim of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) task force for Acute Circulatory Failure was to present clinically relevant, evidence-based treatment recommendations on this topic.

methodsThis guideline was developed according to standards for trustworthy guidelines, including a systematic review of the literature and use of the GRADE methodology for assessment of the quality of evidence and for moving from evidence to recommendations. We assessed the following subpopulations of patients with acute circulatory failure: 1) shock in general, 2) septic shock, 3) cardiogenic shock, 4) hypovolemic shock and 5) other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock. We assessed patient-important outcome measures, including mortality, serious adverse reactions and quality-of-life.

resultsFor patients with shock in general and those with septic shock, we recommend using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, and we suggest using norepinephrine rather than epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine. For patients with cardiogenic shock and those with hypovolemic shock, we suggest using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, and we provide no recommendations/suggestions of norepinephrine vs. epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine. For patients with other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock, we suggest using norepinephrine rather than dopamine, epinephrine, vasopressin analogues, and phenylephrine.

conclusionsWe recommend using norepinephrine rather than other vasopressors as first-line treatment for the majority of adult critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAcute DiseaseHumansNorepinephrineShockVasoconstrictor AgentsNorepinephrineVasoconstrictor Agents

Identifiers

PMID27576362
PMCPMC5213738
OpenAlexW2517170939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.