ArticleJournal of intensive care2022
Esmolol response in septic shock patients in relation to vascular waterfall phenomenon measured by critical closure pressure and mean systemic filling pressure: a prospective observational study.
Article in Journal of intensive care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current and future strategies aiming at reducing catecholamine exposure in septic shock.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Arteriolar Collapse and Haemodynamic Incoherence in Shock: Rethinking Critical Closing Pressure.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Venous congestion from a vascular waterfall perspective: reframing congestion as a dynamic Starling resistor phenomenon.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Review
- Effect of norepinephrine on the vascular waterfall and tissue perfusion in vasoplegic hypotensive patients: a prospective, observational, applied physiology study in cardiac surgery.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBedside measurements of critical closure pressure (Pcc) and mean systemic circulation filling pressure (Pmsf) were utilized to evaluate the response to esmolol in septic shock patients, in relation to the vascular waterfall phenomenon and body oxygen supply and demand.
methodsThis prospective observational self-controlled study included patients with septic shock, newly admitted to the intensive care unit, between August 2019 and January 2021. Pcc and Pmsf, along with the heart rate and other hemodynamic indicators were observed and compared before and 1 h after esmolol IV infusion.
resultsAfter 24 h of initial hemodynamic optimization, 56 patients were finally enrolled. After start of esmolol infusion, patients had a significant decrease in cardiac index (CI) (4.0 vs. 3.3 L/min/m
conclusionPatients with septic shock whose heart rate is greater than 95 beats/min after hemodynamic optimization were treated with esmolol, which could effectively control heart rate and reduce CI, as well as improve Pcc and increase the difference between Pcc and Pmsf (known as "vascular waterfall" phenomenon), without affecting MAP, CVP, Pmsf and arteriovenous vascular resistance, and improve the balance of oxygen supply and demand in the body.
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.