ArticleAnnals of intensive care2019
Current use of vasopressors in septic shock.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
88 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 189 citations in OpenAlex.
- Closed-loop vasopressor systems for hemodynamic control in perioperative and critical care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Pooled it
- Association of noradrenaline dose with mortality in critically ill patients: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Methylene blue in sepsis and septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of methylene blue in patients with vasodilatory shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Timing of norepinephrine initiation in patients with septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2020Pooled it
- The effects and safety of vasopressin receptor agonists in patients with septic shock: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Pooled it
- Early multimodal vasopressor strategy in septic shock: results of the TRICYCLE randomized controlled trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Outcomes in participants with failure of initial antibacterial therapy for hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia prior to enrollment in the randomized, controlled phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Trial
- Alarm configuration and adherence to prescribed mean arterial pressure targets in the intensive care unit: A multicentre pre-post evaluation.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026Article
- The association between documented right ventricular dysfunction and in-hospital mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients receiving a noradrenaline infusion: A retrospective observational cohort study.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026Article
- FIRST-ICU: forecasting interventions and risk stratification in the ICU using graph neural network autoencoders.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical criteria for the definition of refractory septic shock: a joint Delphi consensus from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM).Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Survival status and predictors of mortality among burn patients admitted to intensive care units at burn centres in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a retrospective follow-up study.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Safety of Administration of Vasopressors Through Peripheral Compared to Central Venous Catheters in a Rural Kenyan Hospital: Protocol for a Prospective Observational Cohort Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Observational
- Impact of prehospital antibiotic therapy differs depending on septic shock origin.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Prehospital Care Duration and 30-Day Mortality Among Septic Shock.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Norepinephrine pharmacolexicology: a chronological review of dose reporting and the implications of salt formulations.Intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- It's Time to Consider How We Should Use Vasopressors, Rather Than Just Which We Should Use.Critical care explorations · 2025Article
- Perceptions, availability and use of vasopressors for septic shock in emergency care settings in Tanzania.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025Article
- Vasopressin and its analogues in patients with septic shock: holy Grail or unfulfilled promise?Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
34 authors at 20 institutions in 11 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVasopressors are commonly applied to restore and maintain blood pressure in patients with sepsis. We aimed to evaluate the current practice and therapeutic goals regarding vasopressor use in septic shock as a basis for future studies and to provide some recommendations on their use.
methodsFrom November 2016 to April 2017, an anonymous web-based survey on the use of vasoactive drugs was accessible to members of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). A total of 17 questions focused on the profile of respondents, triggering factors, first choice agent, dosing, timing, targets, additional treatments, and effects of vasopressors. We investigated whether the answers complied with current guidelines. In addition, a group of 34 international ESICM experts was asked to formulate recommendations for the use of vasopressors based on 6 questions with sub-questions (total 14).
resultsA total of 839 physicians from 82 countries (65% main specialty/activity intensive care) responded. The main trigger for vasopressor use was an insufficient mean arterial pressure (MAP) response to initial fluid resuscitation (83%). The first-line vasopressor was norepinephrine (97%), targeting predominantly a MAP > 60-65 mmHg (70%), with higher targets in patients with chronic arterial hypertension (79%). The experts agreed on 10 recommendations, 9 of which were based on unanimous or strong (≥ 80%) agreement. They recommended not to delay vasopressor treatment until fluid resuscitation is completed but rather to start with norepinephrine early to achieve a target MAP of ≥ 65 mmHg.
conclusionReported vasopressor use in septic shock is compliant with contemporary guidelines. Future studies should focus on individualized treatment targets including earlier use of vasopressors.
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.