Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36431304›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Multifactorial Shock: A Neglected Situation in Polytrauma Patients.

Jialiu Luo, Deng Chen, Liangsheng Tang, Hai Deng, Cong Zhang, Shunyao Chen, Teding Chang, Liming Dong, Wenguo Wang, Huaqiang Xu and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Is polytrauma really just a simple accident? Recurrent characteristic of polytrauma.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
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

17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jialiu LuoDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8179-5236
Deng ChenDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Liangsheng TangDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Hai DengDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2337-5222
Cong ZhangDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Shunyao ChenDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Teding ChangDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Liming DongDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Wenguo WangIntensive Care Unit, Trauma Center, Suizhou Central Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Suizhou 441300, China.
Huaqiang XuIntensive Care Unit, Trauma Center, Suizhou Central Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Suizhou 441300, China.
Miaobo HeIntensive Care Unit, Trauma Center, Suizhou Central Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Suizhou 441300, China.
Dongli WanIntensive Care Unit, Trauma Center, Suizhou Central Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Suizhou 441300, China.
Gang YinDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Trauma Center, Tianmen First People's Hospital, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Tianmen 417300, China.
Mengfan WuDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Trauma Center, Tianmen First People's Hospital, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Tianmen 417300, China.
Fengsheng CaoDepartment of Emergency and Intensive Care, Trauma Center, Xiangyang Central Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang 441021, China.
Yang LiuDepartment of Emergency and Intensive Care, Trauma Center, Xiangyang Central Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang 441021, China.
Zhao-Hui TangDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Tongji Trauma Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Tongji Hospital · CNSuizhou Central Hospital · CNHubei University of Arts and Science · CNHubei University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81873870
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Shock after traumatic injury is likely to be hypovolemic, but different types of shock (distributive shock, obstructive shock, or cardiogenic shock) can occur in combination, known as multifactorial shock. Multifactorial shock is a neglected area of study, and is only reported sporadically. Little is known about the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of multifactorial shock after polytrauma. Methods: A retrospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted in four Level I trauma centers involving 1051 polytrauma patients from June 2020 to April 2022. Results: The mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 31.1, indicating a severely injured population. The most common type of shock in the early phase after polytrauma (≤48 h) is hypovolemic shock (83.2%), followed by distributive shock (14.4%), obstructive shock (8.7%), and cardiogenic shock (3.8%). In the middle phase after polytrauma (>48 h or ≤14 days), the most common type of shock is distributive shock (70.7%), followed by hypovolemic shock (27.2%), obstructive shock (9.9%), and cardiogenic shock (7.2%). Multifactorial shock accounted for 9.7% of the entire shock population in the early phase and 15.2% in the middle phase. In total, seven combinations of multifactorial shock were described. Patients with multifactorial shock have a significantly higher complication rate and mortality than those with single-factor shock. Conclusions: This study characterizes the incidence of various types of shock in different phases after polytrauma and emphasizes that different types of shock can occur simultaneously or sequentially in polytrauma patients. Multifactorial shock has a relatively high incidence and mortality in polytrauma patients, and trauma specialists should be alert to the possibility of their occurrence.

Indexed as

multifactorial shockpolytraumaretrospective studyshock

Identifiers

PMID36431304
PMCPMC9698644
OpenAlexW4309738738

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.