Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33387216›Full record

ReviewMolecular and cellular biochemistry2021

Biochemical markers for clinical monitoring of tissue perfusion.

Marek Janotka, Petr Ostadal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular and cellular biochemistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Cardiac index, SvOCritical care (London, England) · 2025
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Changes in COJournal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Central Venous-arterial Carbon Dioxide Difference (pCOIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Combination of CJournal of intensive care · 2025
    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

2 authors.

Marek JanotkaCardiovascular Center, Na Homolce Hospital, 15000, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4905-5013
Petr OstadalCardiovascular Center, Na Homolce Hospital, 15000, Prague, Czech Republic. ostadal.petr@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9550-222X

Funding

Institutional grant MH CZ - DRO (Nemocnice Na Homolce - NNH, 00023884) IG150501
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The assessment and monitoring of the tissue perfusion is extremely important in critical conditions involving circulatory shock. There is a wide range of established methods for the assessment of cardiac output as a surrogate of oxygen delivery to the peripheral tissues. However, the evaluation of whether particular oxygen delivery is sufficient to ensure cellular metabolic demands is more challenging. In recent years, specific biochemical parameters have been described to indicate the status between tissue oxygen demands and supply. In this review, the authors summarize the application of some of these biochemical markers, including mixed venous oxygen saturation (S

Indexed as

MicrocirculationArteriesBiomarkersCarbon DioxideGlucoseHemodynamicsHumansHypoxiaLactic AcidMonitoring, PhysiologicOxygenOxygen ConsumptionPerfusionPrognosisSpectroscopy, Near-InfraredBiomarkersCarbon DioxideGlucoseLactic AcidOxygenCirculatory shockHemodynamic monitoringLactateMicrocirculationOxygen saturationTissue perfusion

Identifiers

PMID33387216
PMCPMC7921020

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.