Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32688443›Full record

SynthesisMicrocirculation (New York, N.Y. : 1994)2020

Therapeutic interventions to restore microcirculatory perfusion following experimental hemorrhagic shock and fluid resuscitation: A systematic review.

Anoek L I van Leeuwen, Nicole A M Dekker, Elise P Jansma, Christa Boer, Charissa E van den Brom

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Microcirculation (New York, N.Y. : 1994), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Hemorrhagic shock and fluid dynamics.Physiological reports · 2021
    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 1 institution in 1 country.

Anoek L I van LeeuwenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Experimental Laboratory for VItal Signs, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6552-0830
Nicole A M DekkerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Experimental Laboratory for VItal Signs, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0300-3026
Elise P JansmaDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1516-2171
Christa BoerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Experimental Laboratory for VItal Signs, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7781-6951
Charissa E van den BromDepartment of Anesthesiology, Experimental Laboratory for VItal Signs, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0886-1388
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMicrocirculatory perfusion disturbances following hemorrhagic shock and fluid resuscitation contribute to multiple organ dysfunction and mortality. Standard fluid resuscitation is insufficient to restore microcirculatory perfusion; however, additional therapies are lacking. We conducted a systematic search to provide an overview of potential non-fluid-based therapeutic interventions to restore microcirculatory perfusion following hemorrhagic shock.

methodsA structured search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was performed in March 2020. Animal studies needed to report at least one parameter of microcirculatory flow (perfusion, red blood cell velocity, functional capillary density).

resultsThe search identified 1269 records of which 48 fulfilled all eligibility criteria. In total, 62 drugs were tested of which 29 were able to restore microcirculatory perfusion. Particularly, complement inhibitors (75% of drugs tested successfully restored blood flow), endothelial barrier modulators (100% successful), antioxidants (66% successful), drugs targeting cell metabolism (83% successful), and sex hormones (75% successful) restored microcirculatory perfusion. Other drugs consisted of attenuation of inflammation (100% not successful), vasoactive agents (68% not successful), and steroid hormones (75% not successful).

conclusionImproving mitochondrial function, inhibition of complement inhibition, and reducing microvascular leakage via restoration of endothelial barrier function seem beneficial to restore microcirculatory perfusion following hemorrhagic shock and fluid resuscitation.

Indexed as

Fluid TherapyMicrocirculationResuscitationShock, HemorrhagicAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalHumansanimal modelscapillary perfusionfluid resuscitationhemorrhagic shock

Identifiers

PMID32688443
PMCPMC7757213
OpenAlexW3043923167

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.