Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35813900›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical and translational research2022

Vasopressin versus norepinephrine as the first-line vasopressor in septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yub Raj Sedhai, Dhan Bahadur Shrestha, Pravash Budhathoki, Waqas Memon, Roshan Acharya, Suman Gaire, Nisheem Pokharel, Swojay Maharjan, Ranjit Jasaraj, Amik Sodhi and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical and translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Vasopressin: a review of clinical indications.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yub Raj SedhaiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Hospital Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia, United States.
Dhan Bahadur ShresthaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, United States.
Pravash BudhathokiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Bronxcare Health System, Bronx, New York, United States.
Waqas MemonDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States.
Roshan AcharyaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, Fayetteville, North Carolina, United States.
Suman GaireDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Palpa Hospital, Palpa, Nepal.
Nisheem PokharelDepartment of Emergency Medicine, KIST Medical College, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Swojay MaharjanNepalese Army Institute of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Ranjit JasarajDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, United States.
Amik SodhiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary Disease and Critical Care Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, United States.
Dipen KadariyaAttending Physician, Pulmonary Disease and Critical Care Medicine, Independent Practitioner.
Ankush AsijaDepartment of Internal Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgan Town, West Virginia, United States.
Markos G KashiourisDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Pulmonary Disease and Critical Care Medicine, VCU School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia, United States.
Nepalese Army Institute of Health Services · NPPatan Hospital · NP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aim: Norepinephrine is currently the first-line vasopressor for septic shock. We conducted this meta-analysis to examine the outcomes of adult patients with septic shock who received vasopressin instead of norepinephrine. Methods: We selected studies in adults with septic shock that compared the outcomes of patients treated with vasopressin versus norepinephrine. Cochrane ROB 2.0 and the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tools were used to assess the risk of bias in RCTs and observational studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4. Results: Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in 28-day mortality rates (OR, 1.07; CI, 0.80-1.44) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (OR, 0.74; CI, 0.21-2.67) between the two groups. Similarly, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, mean arterial pressure at 24 h, urine output at 24 h, and serious adverse events also did not differ significantly. However, the odds of renal replacement therapy (RRT) requirement in the vasopressin group were substantially lower than in the norepinephrine group (OR, 0.68; CI, 0.47-0.98). Conclusion: There were no differences in mortality, duration of hospitalization, and adverse effects in adults with septic shock across the two groups. However, the patients treated with vasopressin had lower chances of requiring RRT. Relevance for Patients: Vasopressin use as the first-line vasopressor in septic shock showed a significant reduction in RRT, though there were no significant differences in terms of mortality and other adverse events. Therefore, vasopressin can be considered as a first-line vasopressor in septic shock patients with other risk factors which may contribute to renal failure requiring RRT.

Indexed as

norepinephrineoutcomesrenal replacementseptic shockvasopressin

Identifiers

PMID35813900
PMCPMC9260345
OpenAlexW4285019711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.