Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35469224›Full record

SynthesisComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022

Effect of Pulse Indicator Continuous Cardiac Output Monitoring on Septic Shock Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

Bin Wang, Lijuan Cai, Bin Lin, Qiongxiao He, Xuejun Ding

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [S3 guideline on sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care-update 2025].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bin WangEmergency Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou City, 310000 Zhejiang Province, China.
Lijuan CaiEmergency Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou City, 310000 Zhejiang Province, China.
Bin LinEmergency Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou City, 310000 Zhejiang Province, China.
Qiongxiao HeEmergency Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou City, 310000 Zhejiang Province, China.
Xuejun DingEmergency Department, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou City, 310000 Zhejiang Province, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9272-1806
The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Septic shock (SS) is the most common severe syndrome in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Enhancing the monitoring of hemodynamic indexes in SS patients carries huge clinical implications for reducing patient mortality. Recently, pulse indicator continuous cardiac output (PICCO) has been widely used in clinical practice, but its advantages than central venous pressure (CVP) in guiding the treatment of SS patients remains to be refined. Therefore, this study is aimed at assessing the clinical effects of PICCO in the treatment of patients with SS. Methods: The authors systematically searched several databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge) between January 2001 and February 2021. When searching for relevant articles, the authors combined the following phrases describing the monitoring group ("pulse indicator continuous cardiac output," "central venous pressure") with the disease of interest as well as management ("SS," "sepsis"). The outcomes were independently assessed by two reviewers who scored the articles for methodological quality using the Cochrane Collaboration's "risk of bias" tool. Forest plots, as well as sensitivity and bias analyses, were carried out for the included articles. The primary outcome measures were length of ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, 28-day mortality, and fluid resuscitation volume. Results: Ten studies comprising 350 cases monitored with PICCO and 373 cases monitored with traditional CVP were eventually identified. PICCO-monitored patients were observed to be significantly associated with shorter ICU stay than CVP-monitored patients (MD: -3.04, 95% CI: -4.74 to -1.34, Conclusion: PICCO monitoring technique can significantly improve the prognosis of SS patients, shorten the time of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay, and reduce the 28-day mortality, which has positive guiding significance for patients with SS. Given the limitations of the quantity and quality of included studies, further research is warranted to verify the conclusions.

Indexed as

Shock, SepticCardiac OutputFluid TherapyHeart RateHumansMonitoring, Physiologic

Identifiers

PMID35469224
PMCPMC9034907
OpenAlexW4224120413

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.