Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31183779›Full record

SynthesisCurrent heart failure reports2019

Morphine Use in the Treatment of Acute Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema and Its Effects on Patient Outcome: A Systematic Review.

Víctor Gil, Alberto Domínguez-Rodríguez, Josep Masip, W Frank Peacock, Òscar Miró

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current heart failure reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Introducing palliative care into the management of patients disqualified from transcatheter aortic valve implantation.Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. 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 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Víctor GilEmergency Department, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. vgil@clinic.cat.
Alberto Domínguez-RodríguezCardiology Department, Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Tenerife, Spain.
Josep MasipCardiology Department, Hospital Teknon, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
W Frank PeacockGREAT Network, Rome, Italy.
Òscar MiróEmergency Department, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
Baylor College of Medicine · USFundació Clínic per a la Recerca Biomèdica · ESHospital Quirón Teknon · ESHospital Universitario de Canarias · ESUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo analyze whether the use of morphine, as initial treatment in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE), has an impact in clinical outcomes and mortality. A systematic review of the literature was performed, including all the studies comparing clinical outcomes in patients with ACPE who were treated or not with morphine. RECENT

findingsSeven studies were selected, none of which were a randomized trial focused on answering the aim of this systematic review. The studies consisted of clinical trial secondary analysis assessing non-invasive ventilation in ACPE, one open non-randomized trial, two propensity score evaluations from large registries, and three clinical case reviews. Most of the studies showed unfavorable results with the use of morphine in terms of adverse events and mortality, and many of them were statistically significant. Finally, the ongoing MIdazolam versus MOrphine in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (MIMO) trial was specifically designed to compare the results of morphine use versus midazolam. The potential hemodynamic and sedative benefit of the use of morphine for vasodilatation and dyspnea amelioration may be opposed by an increase in mortality, ICU admission, and adverse events. Until there is a randomized clinical trial, the use of morphine for ACPE should be limited.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseHeart FailureHumansMorphine DerivativesPulmonary EdemaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeMorphine DerivativesAcute CardiogenicHeart FailureMorphineOutcomesPulmonary Edema

Identifiers

PMID31183779
OpenAlexW2951367445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.