ArticlePloS one2021
Pralidoxime improves the hemodynamics and survival of rats with peritonitis-induced sepsis.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect Evaluation of Norepinephrine on Cardiac Function in Patients with Sepsis by Cardiac Ultrasound Imaging.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several studies have suggested that sympathetic overstimulation causes deleterious effects in septic shock. A previous study suggested that pralidoxime exerted a pressor effect through a mechanism unrelated to the sympathetic nervous system; this effect was buffered by the vasodepressor action of pralidoxime mediated through sympathoinhibition. In this study, we explored the effects of pralidoxime on hemodynamics and survival in rats with peritonitis-induced sepsis. This study consisted of two sub-studies: survival and hemodynamic studies. In the survival study, 66 rats, which survived for 10 hours after cecal ligation and puncture (CLP), randomly received saline placebo, pralidoxime, or norepinephrine treatment and were monitored for up to 24 hours. In the hemodynamic study, 44 rats were randomly assigned to sham, CLP-saline placebo, CLP-pralidoxime, or CLP-norepinephrine groups, and hemodynamic measurements were performed using a conductance catheter placed in the left ventricle. In the survival study, 6 (27.2%), 15 (68.1%), and 5 (22.7%) animals survived the entire 24-hour monitoring period in the saline, pralidoxime, and norepinephrine groups, respectively (log-rank test P = 0.006). In the hemodynamic study, pralidoxime but not norepinephrine increased end-diastolic volume (P <0.001), stroke volume (P = 0.002), cardiac output (P = 0.003), mean arterial pressure (P = 0.041), and stroke work (P <0.001). The pressor effect of norepinephrine was short-lived, such that by 60 minutes after the initiation of norepinephrine infusion, it no longer had any significant effect on mean arterial pressure. In addition, norepinephrine significantly increased heart rate (P <0.001) and the ratio of arterial elastance to ventricular end-systolic elastance (P = 0.010), but pralidoxime did not. In conclusion, pralidoxime improved the hemodynamics and 24-hour survival rate in rats with peritonitis-induced sepsis, but norepinephrine did not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.