Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36388905›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

Methylene blue dosing strategies in critically ill adults with shock-A retrospective cohort study.

Sibel Sari-Yavuz, Ka-Lin Heck-Swain, Marius Keller, Harry Magunia, You-Shan Feng, Helene A Haeberle, Petra Wied, Christian Schlensak, Peter Rosenberger, Michael Koeppen

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sibel Sari-YavuzDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Ka-Lin Heck-SwainDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Marius KellerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Harry MaguniaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
You-Shan FengInstitute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biostatistics (IKEaB), Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Helene A HaeberleDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Petra WiedDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Christian SchlensakDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Peter RosenbergerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Michael KoeppenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
University Children's Hospital Tübingen · DEUniversity of Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Shock increases mortality in the critically ill and the mainstay of therapy is the administration of vasopressor agents to achieve hemodynamic targets. In the past, studies have found that the NO-pathway antagonist methylene blue improves hemodynamics. However, the optimal dosing strategy remains elusive. Therefore, we investigated the hemodynamic and ICU outcome parameters of three different dosing strategies for methylene blue. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients in shock treated with methylene blue. Shock was defined as norepinephrine dose >0.1 μg/kg/min and serum lactate level >2 mmol/l at the start of methylene blue administration. Different demographic variables, ICU treatment, and outcome parameters were evaluated. To compare the differences in the administration of vasopressors or inotropes, the vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) was calculated at different time points after starting the administration of methylene blue. Response to methylene blue or mortality at 28 days were assessed. Results: 262 patients from July 2014 to October 2019 received methylene blue. 209 patients met the inclusion criteria. Three different dosing strategies were identified: bolus injection followed by continuous infusion ( Conclusion: In this cohort, methylene blue as a bolus injection followed by continuous infusion was associated with a reduced 28-day mortality in patients with shock. Prospective studies are needed to systematically evaluate the role of methylene blue in the treatment of shock.

Indexed as

clinical trialcritical caremethylene blueretrospective studyshock

Identifiers

PMID36388905
PMCPMC9650001
OpenAlexW4307706260

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.