SynthesisMedicine2017
Dopamine versus norepinephrine in the treatment of cardiogenic shock: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dopamine in critically ill patients with cardiac dysfunction: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2019Pooled it
- Rapid Treatment of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Cardiogenic Shock in the Emergency Setting.Cardiology and cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Cardiogenic Shock Centers and Protocols for Acute Cardiovascular Care: Bridging the Gap Between Spoke and Hub Sites.Cardiology and therapy · 2026Review
- Pharmacological assessment of drugs retained in the 1Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Timing of Vasopressin Initiation in Patients with Septic Shock: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Managing Arrhythmias in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights Into Milrinone and Dobutamine Therapy.Cureus · 2024Review
- Exploration of different statistical approaches in the comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock: SOAP II.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- A Clinical Update on Vasoactive Medication in the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2022Review
- Vasoactive pharmacological management according to SCAI class in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock.PloS one · 2022Article
- Vasoactive pharmacologic therapy in cardiogenic shock: a critical review.Journal of drug assessment · 2021Article
- Norepinephrine with dopamine infusion on the end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETco2) pressure in patients with septic shock.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2021Article
- Brazilian guidelines for the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The task force of the AMIB, ABTO, BRICNet, and the General Coordination of the National Transplant System.Annals of intensive care · 2020Article
- Inotropic Agents and Vasopressors in the Treatment of Cardiogenic Shock.Current heart failure reports · 2020Review
- Comparison of Dopamine and Norepinephrine Use for the Treatment of Hypotension in Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients with Return of Spontaneous Circulation.Emergency medicine international · 2020Article
- Brazilian guidelines for the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The task force of the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Brasileira de Transplantes de Órgãos, Brazilian Research in Critical Care Network, and the General Coordination of the National Transplant System.Revista Brasileira de terapia intensivaArticle
- Therapeutic Advances in the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.American journal of therapeuticsReview
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGuidelines recommend that norepinephrine (NA) should be used to reach the target mean arterial pressure (MAP) during cardiogenic shock (CS), rather than epinephrine and dopamine (DA). However, there has actually been few studies on comparing norepinephrine with dopamine and their results conflicts. These studies raise a heat discussion. This study aimed to validate the effectiveness of norepinephrine for treating CS in comparison with dopamine.
methodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess pooled estimates of risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for 28-day mortality, incidence of arrhythmic events, gastrointestinal reaction, and some indexes after treatment.
resultsCompared with dopamine, patients receiving norepinephrine had a lower 28-day mortality (RR 1.611 [95% CI 1.219-2.129]; P < .001; P heterogeneity = .01), a lower risk of arrhythmic events (RR 3.426 [95% CI 2.120-5.510]; P < .001; P heterogeneity = .875) and a lower risk of gastrointestinal reaction (RR 5.474 [95% CI 2.917-10.273]; P < .001; P heterogeneity = 0). In subgroup analyses on 28-day mortality by causes of CS, there were more benefits from norepinephrine than dopamine in 2 subgroups.
conclusionsOur analysis revealed that norepinephrine was associated with a lower 28-day mortality, a lower risk of arrhythmic events, and gastrointestinal reaction. No matter whether CS is caused by coronary heart disease or not, norepinephrine is superior to dopamine for correcting CS on the 28-day mortality.
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.