Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28970657›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2017

Vasopressin in Septic Shock; Assessment of Sepsis Biomarkers: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Elchin Barzegar, Masoumeh Nouri, Sarah Mousavi, Arezoo Ahmadi, Mojtaba Mojtahedzadeh

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Comparison of Norepinephrine and Terlipressin vs Norepinephrine Alone for Management of Septic Shock: A Randomized Control Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elchin BarzegarDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy (Pharmacotherapy), School of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Masoumeh NouriDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy (Pharmacotherapy), School of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sarah MousaviDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Arezoo AhmadiDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Sina Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mojtaba MojtahedzadehDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy (Pharmacotherapy), School of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Tehran University of Medical Sciences · IRIsfahan University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsVasopressin (VP) in sepsis apart from vasoconstrictive effect may have some immunomodulatory effects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of VP on different aspect of sepsis by measuring of sepsis biomarkers. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this trial, a total number of 42 septic shock patients were included. The first group received norepinephrine (NE) infusion to reach the target mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥ 65 mm Hg and the second group received arginine vasopressin (AVP) infusion in addition to NE. Serum lactate, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, pentraxin 3 (PTX3), angiopoietin 1 and 2 (Ang 1 and 2) levels were assessed.

resultsLevel of IL-6 and IL-10 decreased, but there was no significant difference between the two groups after 48 h. CRP and PTX3 levels were not also significantly different between groups. Although Angs were not statistically different, there was a trend toward higher Ang-1 in and lower Ang 2 in AVP group after 24 and 48 h. In addition, lactate level did not differ between NE and AVP groups. There was no interaction between VP and hydrocortisone use on IL-6, IL-10, and PTX3, but a significant statistical interaction on Ang 1 and Ang 2 were observed.

conclusionsAlthough analysis of sepsis biomarkers showed no significant difference between two groups, no immunomodulatory effect for VP alone, subgroup analysis of hydrocortisone used in this study showed that the combination of glucocorticoids and AVP had a significant effect on Angs level which eventually causes less endothelial permeability and higher MAP in this group of patients.

Indexed as

Sepsis biomarkersseptic shockvasopressin

Identifiers

PMID28970657
PMCPMC5613609
OpenAlexW2755864274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.