ReviewIntensive care medicine2022
Current practice and evolving concepts in septic shock resuscitation.
Review in Intensive care medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06737614 (Can Pulse Pressure Assessment at the Bedside Detect Low Values or Track Changes of Stroke Volume in Critically Ill Patients? The Multicenter, Cross-sectional, Observational, ANDROMEDA-PEGASUS Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 78 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Can Pulse Pressure Assessment at the Bedside Detect Low Values or Track Changes of Stroke Volume in Critically Ill Patients? The Multicenter, Cross-sectional, Observational, ANDROMEDA-PEGASUS Study
Who cites it
78 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Utilization of left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral in the assessment of fluid responsiveness in adult patients with sepsis or septic shock - a systematic review.Journal of ultrasound · 2025Pooled it
- Research trends and hotspots on septic shock: a bibliometric study and visualization analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Sublingual microcirculatory assessment on admission independently predicts the outcome of old intensive care patients suffering from shock.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Direct assessment of microcirculation in shock: a randomized-controlled multicenter study.Intensive care medicine · 2023Trial
- Early adjunctive methylene blue in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Trial
- (1 → 3)-β-D-Glucan-guided antifungal therapy in adults with sepsis: the CandiSep randomized clinical trial.Intensive care medicine · 2022Trial
- Venous dimension of shock: Integrating arterial inflow and venous back-pressure in hemodynamic assessment.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Effect of Weight-based versus Absolute Norepinephrine Dosing on Mortality Risk in Obese Patients with Septic Shock: An Observational, Multicohort, Retrospective Study.Anesthesiology · 2026Observational
- miR-222-3p targeting MEGF9 exacerbates sepsis-induced myocardial injury.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Mean arterial pressure-to-norepinephrine-equivalent dose ratio, rather than achieved mean arterial pressure alone, is associated with mortality in septic shock.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Association of Relaxin-1 Levels with Mortality in Sepsis and Septic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A computational model for predicting shock in patients at risk of urosepsis after urolithiasis surgery.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Septic Cardiomyopathy: Age-Dependent Physiology and Hemodynamic Aspects-A Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Dose Optimization of Piperacillin for Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection in Febrile Neutropenic Pediatric Patients.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2026Article
- Rethinking Fluid Resuscitation in Septic Shock: A Phase-Adapted, Endothelium-Sparing Approach to Mitigate Capillary Leak.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Unnecessary fluid therapy in patients with shock: Five classic fluid pitfalls and five ways to do it better.Annals of intensive care · 2026Review
- Personalised fluid therapy in septic shock.Annals of intensive care · 2026Review
- Current standard of care for septic shock.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- A single oral administration of resveratrol cocrystals enables potent antisepsis therapy via interfering neutrophil extracellular traps formation.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2025Article
- Venous congestion from a vascular waterfall perspective: reframing congestion as a dynamic Starling resistor phenomenon.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Review
18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical and pathophysiological understanding of septic shock has progressed exponentially in the previous decades, translating into a steady decrease in septic shock-related morbidity and mortality. Even though large randomized, controlled trials have addressed fundamental aspects of septic shock resuscitation, many questions still exist. In this review, we will describe the current standards of septic shock resuscitation, but the emphasis will be placed on evolving concepts in different domains such as clinical resuscitation targets, adequate use of fluids and vasoactive drugs, refractory shock, and the use of extracorporeal therapies. Multiple research opportunities remain open, and collaborative endeavors should be performed to fill in these gaps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34910228What 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.