Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36470828›Full record

ReviewEBioMedicine2022

Current sepsis therapeutics.

Jean-Louis Vincent

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EBioMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
23.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

125 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 168 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jean-Louis VincentDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasme Hospital, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: jlvincent@intensive.org.
Université Libre de Bruxelles · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management of the patient with sepsis comprises three key branches: control of the underlying infection, haemodynamic stabilization, and modulation of the host response. Each aspect should be considered in all patients and, when relevant, managed at the same time. Infection control is applicable to all patients with sepsis and will include antibiotic therapy and often surgical intervention to remove an infectious source. Haemodynamic support involves fluid administration in all patients and vasoactive agents in patients with associated circulatory shock. Noradrenaline is the first choice vasopressor agent; inotropic agents, usually dobutamine, may be added in case of myocardial depression. No interventions directed at individual components of the host response to sepsis have yet been shown to improve outcomes, but glucocorticoids and vasopressin have a global impact on the response and can thus be considered in this category. A move toward more personalized treatment is needed across all three arms of sepsis management.

Indexed as

SepsisShock, SepticAnti-Bacterial AgentsHemodynamicsHumansVasoconstrictor AgentsAnti-Bacterial AgentsVasoconstrictor AgentsDobutamineHaemodynamic monitoringLactateOrgan failurePersonalization

Identifiers

PMID36470828
PMCPMC9782815
OpenAlexW4310778978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.