ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2022
Methylene Blue to Neonatal Septic Shock treatment in neonate pigs
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methylene blue therapy in addition to standard treatment for acute-phase septic shock: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe authors design an animal model of neonatal sepsis to analyze the treatment of neonatal septic shock with Methylene Blue (MB) in a swine model.
methodsThe study design included twenty male newborn pigs divided into four groups: 1) The control group; 2) The sepsis group (induced with lipopolysaccharide); 3) The MB group, and 4) The MB-treated sepsis group. Septic shock was defined as Blood Pressure (BP) dropping 20% below the baseline value. Continuous Blood Pressure (BP), Nitric Oxide (NO) levels, cyclic Guanosine Monophosphate (cGMP), malondialdehyde acid, base excess, lactate, arterial blood gases, hematocrit, and echocardiography were analyzed.
resultsThe BP of the sepsis group treated with MB showed a slight improvement in the first hour after treatment; however, a significant difference was not observed compared to the untreated sepsis group. Besides hemodynamic stability, the current study did not show symptomatic pulmonary hypertension, suggesting that MB was safe in neonates and children. An improvement in Base Excel (BE) levels after MB administration in septic animals may indicate a possible improvement in microcirculation.
conclusionThe MB improved biomarkers related to septic shock prognosis, although an improvement in the blood levels could not be detected. MB might be a beneficial drug for hemodynamic instability in infants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.