Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35308665›Full record

ReviewCureus2022

Sepsis Management, Controversies, and Advancement in Nanotechnology: A Systematic Review.

Rabia Choudhary

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. [Early source control of infection in patients seen in the emergency department: a systematic review].Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Recent nanoengineered therapeutic advancements in sepsis management.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

1 author.

Rabia ChoudharyMedicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sepsis is a potentially dangerous infection that requires prompt identification and treatment. Emergency medicine physicians must grasp the clinical signs and laboratory results of direct and indirect organ failure, the source of infection management, and the criteria for treating sepsis and septic shock. The pathogenesis of sepsis is connected to inflammation and an excess of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, which activate the pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-pattern recognition receptor (PRR) and damage-associated molecular pattern (DAMP)-PRR signaling pathways. The development of rapid, sensitive, and precise techniques for sepsis diagnosis might be aided by nanotechnology, a part of nanomedicine. Nanoparticles (NPs) such as magnetic NPs, gold NPs, fluorescent (silica and quantum dots), and lipid-based NPs have all been discussed to contribute to the detection of sepsis-related microbial infections. Because of the intrinsic and unique features of these nano-sized systems, researchers are evaluating nanotechnology-based alternatives for sepsis control. Recent advances in nanotechnology-based technologies for sepsis detection and management are discussed in this study. Databases (PubMed, Medline, PMC, Google Scholar) were used to source various studies that were carried out on sepsis in terms of assessment, types, diagnosis, and treatment controversies, with more attention being given with a focus on the most recent data, principles, and management guidelines. Priority was also given to studies published within the last 11 years, using keywords such as "sepsis guidelines," "sepsis clinical," "septic risk factors," "sepsis and nano technology," "nano particles," "sepsis controversies," and "nano diagnostic" in the search. After a filtration process, the eight most relevant studies were selected to be included in this review. The filtration process included the use of both inclusion and exclusion criteria. The excluded studies were pediatric populations, obstetrical populations, and nanotechnology advancements dealing with other fields not relating to sepsis. The selected studies were also undertaken through a quality appraisal process using corresponding assessment tools. The selected articles were all highly informative about sepsis and the processes of diagnosis and treatment that are currently in use as well as those that are still being developed or implemented. Furthermore, we look at how nanomedicine in the application of nanomaterials can be employed to efficiently manage sepsis.

Indexed as

antibiotic administration in management of severe sepsisnano-biotechnologynano materialsnano particlesnano technologysepsissepsis treatment

Identifiers

PMID35308665
PMCPMC8918265

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.