Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29197958›Full record

ReviewAnnals of intensive care2017

Immunohaemostasis: a new view on haemostasis during sepsis.

Xavier Delabranche, Julie Helms, Ferhat Meziani

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of intensive care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 151 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Categorizing Sepsis-induced Coagulopathy Using Thromboelastography: An Approach to Address the Second Pillar of Patient Blood Management.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xavier DelabrancheUniversité de Strasbourg, Faculté de Médecine & Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Service de Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg, France.
Julie HelmsUniversité de Strasbourg, Faculté de Médecine & Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Service de Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg, France.
Ferhat MezianiUniversité de Strasbourg, Faculté de Médecine & Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Service de Réanimation, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg, France. ferhat.meziani@chru-strasbourg.fr.
Inserm · FRRegenerative NanoMedicine · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Host infection by a micro-organism triggers systemic inflammation, innate immunity and complement pathways, but also haemostasis activation. The role of thrombin and fibrin generation in host defence is now recognised, and thrombin has become a partner for survival, while it was seen only as one of the "principal suspects" of multiple organ failure and death during septic shock. This review is first focused on pathophysiology. The role of contact activation system, polyphosphates and neutrophil extracellular traps has emerged, offering new potential therapeutic targets. Interestingly, newly recognised host defence peptides (HDPs), derived from thrombin and other "coagulation" factors, are potent inhibitors of bacterial growth. Inhibition of thrombin generation could promote bacterial growth, while HDPs could become novel therapeutic agents against pathogens when resistance to conventional therapies grows. In a second part, we focused on sepsis-induced coagulopathy diagnostic challenge and stratification from "adaptive" haemostasis to "noxious" disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) either thrombotic or haemorrhagic. Besides usual coagulation tests, we discussed cellular haemostasis assessment including neutrophil, platelet and endothelial cell activation. Then, we examined therapeutic opportunities to prevent or to reduce "excess" thrombin generation, while preserving "adaptive" haemostasis. The fail of international randomised trials involving anticoagulants during septic shock may modify the hypothesis considering the end of haemostasis as a target to improve survival. On the one hand, patients at low risk of mortality may not be treated to preserve "immunothrombosis" as a defence when, on the other hand, patients at high risk with patent excess thrombin and fibrin generation could benefit from available (antithrombin, soluble thrombomodulin) or ongoing (FXI and FXII inhibitors) therapies. We propose to better assess coagulation response during infection by an improved knowledge of pathophysiology and systematic testing including determination of DIC scores. This is one of the clues to allocate the right treatment for the right patient at the right moment.

Indexed as

Contact phaseDisseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC)Host defence peptides (HDPs)InfectionNeutrophil extracellular traps (NETs)Septic shock

Identifiers

PMID29197958
PMCPMC5712298
OpenAlexW2775359073

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.