ReviewJournal of clinical medicine research2016
The Use of Pulmonary Artery Catheter in Sepsis Patients: A Literature Review.
Review 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. It is linked to trial NCT03616730 (Validation of a Non-invasive Cardiac Output Monitor), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Validation of a Non-invasive Cardiac Output Monitor (NICOM) in Pregnant Women With Structural Heart Disease
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2026.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Less-Invasive Hemodynamic and Tissue Perfusion Monitoring in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound Use in Hemodynamic Assessment.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Early hemodynamic assessment using NICOM in patients at risk of developing Sepsis immediately after emergency department triage.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2021Observational
- PRO: The pulmonary artery catheter has a paramount role in current clinical practice.Annals of cardiac anaesthesiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article was to review the literature regarding the use of the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) in the management of patients with sepsis and septic shock. A PubMed search was conducted in order to identify publications evaluating the use of PAC as a tool for management and therapeutic guidance in patients with sepsis. The bibliographies of all identified publications were reviewed for additional relevant references. Much information is identified in the literature regarding the indications for pulmonary artery catheterization in the assessment and treatment of patients with sepsis. Although the PAC has been widely used for many years, there is no clear benefit with regard to outcome, and there is controversy regarding its use. It is not clear that use of the PAC contributes to reduced morbidity and mortality in patients with sepsis. The role of the PAC is becoming less clear, as newer, non-invasive techniques are developed for hemodynamic assessment of sepsis patients. Large, well-designed clinical trials are needed to better assess the role and potential benefit from use of the PAC in sepsis.
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.