Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32053637›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Use of diuretics in shock: Temporal trends and clinical impacts in a propensity-matched cohort study.

Ghassan Bandak, Ankit Sakhuja, Nicole M Andrijasevic, Tina M Gunderson, Ognjen Gajic, Kianoush Kashani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ghassan BandakDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Marshall Health, Huntington, WV, United States of America.
Ankit SakhujaDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of West Virginia, Morgantown, WV, United States of America.
Nicole M AndrijasevicDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Tina M GundersonDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Ognjen GajicDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Kianoush KashaniDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2184-3683
Mayo Clinic · USMarshall Health · USWest Virginia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFluid overload is common among critically ill patients and is associated with worse outcomes. We aimed to assess the effect of diuretics on urine output, vasopressor dose, acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence, and need for renal replacement therapies (RRT) among patients who receive vasopressors. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis is a single-center retrospective study of all adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit between January 2006 and December 2016 and received >6 hours of vasopressor therapy and at least one concomitant dose of diuretic. We excluded patients from cardiac care units. Hourly urine output and vasopressor dose for 6 hours before and after the first dose of diuretic therapy was compared. Rates of AKI development and RRT initiation were assessed with a propensity-matched cohort of patients who received vasopressors but did not receive diuretics.

resultsThere was an increasing trend of prescribing diuretics in patients receiving vasopressors over the course of the study. We included 939 patients with median (IQR) age of 68(57, 78) years old and 400 (43%) female. The average hourly urine output during the first six hours following time zero in comparison with average hourly urine output during the six hours prior to time zero was significantly higher in diuretic group in comparison with patients who did not receive diuretics [81 (95% CI 73-89) ml/h vs. 42 (95% CI 39-45) ml/h, respectively; p<0.001]. After propensity matching, the rate of AKI within 7 days of exposure and the need for RRT were similar between the study and matched control patients (66 (15.6%) vs. 83 (19.6%), p = 0.11, and 34 (8.0%) vs. 37 (8.7%), p = 0.69, respectively). Mortality, however, was higher in the group that received diuretics. Ninety-day mortality was 191 (45.2%) in the exposed group VS 156 (36.9%) p = .009.

conclusionsWhile the use of diuretic therapy in critically ill patients receiving vasopressor infusions augmented urine output, it was not associated with higher vasopressor requirements, AKI incidence, and need for renal replacement therapy.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryAgedCohort StudiesCritical IllnessDiureticsDrug InteractionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRenal Replacement TherapyRetrospective StudiesShockTreatment OutcomeVasoconstrictor AgentsDiureticsVasoconstrictor Agents

Identifiers

PMID32053637
PMCPMC7018137
OpenAlexW3005795672

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.