Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28837628›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Septic shock and the use of norepinephrine in an intermediate care unit: Mortality and adverse events.

Mikael Hallengren, Per Åstrand, Staffan Eksborg, Hans Barle, Claes Frostell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Feasibility and safety of angiotensin II administration in general ward patients during COVID-19 pandemic: a case series.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2020
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Norepinephrine in septic shock.Intensive care medicine · 2019
    Article
  13. Sepsis associated acute kidney injury.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

5 authors.

Mikael HallengrenDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Division of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1481-8511
Per ÅstrandDepartment of Clinical Sciences. Division of Internal Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Staffan EksborgDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Childhood Cancer Research Unit Q6:05 Karolinska Institutet, Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital, Karolinska University Hospital Solna, Stockholm, Sweden.
Hans BarleDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Division of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Claes FrostellDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Division of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeptic shock is associated with high mortality. Aged and multimorbid patients are not always eligible for intensive care units. Norepinephrine is an accepted treatment for hypotension in septic shock. It is unknown whether norepinephrine has a place in treatment outside an intensive care unit and when given peripherally.

objectivesTo describe mortality, Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE-II), time to mean arterial pressure >65 mmHg, and adverse events in patients with septic shock receiving norepinephrine peripherally in an intermediate care unit.

methodsFrom a retrospective chart review of 91 patients with septic shock treated with norepinephrine for hypotension, ward mortality, 30-, 60- and 90-day mortality, standardized mortality ratio (SMR) and adverse events (necrosis and arrhythmia) were analysed. Administration route via peripheral venous catheter or central venous catheter was registered.

resultsMedian age was 81 (43-96) years and median APACHE-II score was 26 (12-42). Observed ward mortality was 27.5% (SMR 0.443, 95% CI: 0.287-0.654), and 30-day and 90-day mortality were 47.2% and 58.2%, respectively.

conclusionsElderly patients with septic shock treated with norepinephrine displayed a better survival in the ward and at 30 days than expected. Our retrospective study did not indicate frequent complications when administering norepinephrine via a peripheral venous catheter.

Indexed as

Hospital UnitsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAPACHEFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorepinephrineRetrospective StudiesShock, SepticNorepinephrine

Identifiers

PMID28837628
PMCPMC5570296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.