Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33315152›Full record

ReviewAnnals of intensive care2020

Post-resuscitation shock: recent advances in pathophysiology and treatment.

Mathieu Jozwiak, Wulfran Bougouin, Guillaume Geri, David Grimaldi, Alain Cariou

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of intensive care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
17.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 168 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Intra-aortic adrenaline titration during cardiac arrest.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Comparison of the Efficacy of Epinephrine vs Norepinephrine in Clinical Outcomes among Children with Postcardiac Arrest Shock: A Hospital-based, Double Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mathieu JozwiakService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Centre, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 27, rue du faubourg Saint Jacques, 75014, Paris, France. mathieu.jozwiak@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3379-4065
Wulfran BougouinService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Hôpital Privé Jacques Cartier, Ramsay Générale de Santé, Massy, France.
Guillaume GeriService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Hôpital Universitaire Ambroise Paré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
David GrimaldiService de Soins Intensifs CUB-Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Bruxelles, Belgium.
Alain CariouService de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Centre, Hôpital Cochin, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 27, rue du faubourg Saint Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Inserm · FRUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BEUniversité Sorbonne Paris Nord · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A post-resuscitation shock occurs in 50-70% of patients who had a cardiac arrest. It is an early and transient complication of the post-resuscitation phase, which frequently leads to multiple-organ failure and high mortality. The pathophysiology of post-resuscitation shock is complex and results from the whole-body ischemia-reperfusion process provoked by the sequence of circulatory arrest, resuscitation manoeuvers and return of spontaneous circulation, combining a myocardial dysfunction and sepsis features, such as vasoplegia, hypovolemia and endothelial dysfunction. Similarly to septic shock, the hemodynamic management of post-resuscitation shock is based on an early and aggressive hemodynamic management, including fluid administration, vasopressors and/or inotropes. Norepinephrine should be considered as the first-line vasopressor in order to avoid arrhythmogenic effects of other catecholamines and dobutamine is the most established inotrope in this situation. Importantly, the optimal mean arterial pressure target during the post-resuscitation shock still remains unknown and may probably vary according to patients. Mechanical circulatory support by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can be necessary in the most severe patients, when the neurological prognosis is assumed to be favourable. Other symptomatic treatments include protective lung ventilation with a target of normoxia and normocapnia and targeted temperature management by avoiding the lowest temperature targets. Early coronary angiogram and coronary reperfusion must be considered in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with preserved neurological prognosis although the timing of coronary angiogram in non-STEMI patients is still a matter of debate. Further clinical research is needed in order to explore new therapeutic opportunities regarding inflammatory, hormonal and vascular dysfunction.

Indexed as

Cardiac arrestCoronary angiogramIschemia–reperfusion syndromeMean arterial pressureMyocardial dysfunctionTargeted temperature managementVasopressors

Identifiers

PMID33315152
PMCPMC7734609
OpenAlexW3112623995

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.