Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31254125›Full record

ArticleAnnals of intensive care2019

Translational gap in pediatric septic shock management: an ESPNIC perspective.

Luc Morin, Martin Kneyber, Nicolaas J G Jansen, Mark J Peters, Etienne Javouhey, Simon Nadel, Graeme Maclaren, Luregn Jan Schlapbach, Pierre Tissieres, ESPNIC Refractory Septic Shock Definition taskforce and the Infection, Systemic Inflammation and Sepsis ESPNIC section

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Sepsis in paediatrics.BJA education · 2021
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. [Paediatric Life Support].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 8 countries.

Luc MorinPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Bicêtre University Hospital, AP-HP, South Paris University, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Martin KneyberPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Beatrix Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Nicolaas J G JansenPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mark J PetersPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Etienne JavouheyPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Lyon University Hospitals, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Bron, France.
Simon NadelPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Saint-Mary's Hospital, London, UK.
Graeme MaclarenDepartment of Pediatrics, Royal Children's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Luregn Jan SchlapbachFaculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Pierre TissieresPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Bicêtre University Hospital, AP-HP, South Paris University, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. pierre.tissieres@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5423-5532
ESPNIC Refractory Septic Shock Definition taskforce and the Infection, Systemic Inflammation and Sepsis ESPNIC section
University of Bern · CHAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust · GBIntensive Care Society · GBUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Saint Mary · US

Funding

Department of Health 15/44/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Surviving Sepsis Campaign and the American College of Critical Care Medicine guidelines have provided recommendations for the management of pediatric septic shock patients. We conducted a survey among the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) members to assess variations to these recommendations.

methodsA total of 114 pediatric intensive care physicians completed an electronic survey. The survey consisted of four standardized clinical cases exploring seven clinical scenarios.

resultsAmong the seven different clinical scenarios, the types of fluids were preferentially non-synthetic colloids (albumin) and crystalloids (isotonic saline) and volume expansion was not limited to 60 ml/kg. Early intubation for mechanical ventilation was used by 70% of the participants. Norepinephrine was stated to be used in 94% of the PICU physicians surveyed, although dopamine or epinephrine is recommended as first-line vasopressors in pediatric septic shock. When norepinephrine was used, the addition of another inotrope was frequent. Specific drugs such as vasopressin or enoximone were used in < 20%. Extracorporeal life support was used or considered by 91% of the physicians audited in certain specific situations, whereas the use of high-flow hemofiltration was considered for 44%.

conclusionsThis pediatric septic shock management survey outlined variability in the current clinician-reported practice of pediatric septic shock management. As most recommendations are not supported by evidence, these findings outline some limitation of existing pediatric guidelines in regard to context and patient's specificity.

Identifiers

PMID31254125
PMCPMC6598895
OpenAlexW2955787629

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.