ArticleInternational journal of critical illness and injury science
Comparison of the effects of vitamin C and thiamine on refractory hypotension in patients with sepsis: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in International journal of critical illness and injury science. 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of different vitamins on individuals with septic shock: a Bayesian NMA of RCTs.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of thiamine (vitamin B1) in sepsis and septic shock: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Review
- The Japanese Critical Care Nutrition Guideline 2024.Journal of intensive care · 2025Review
- Differential effects of thiamine and ascorbic acid in clusters of septic patients identified by latent variable analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- Thiamine as a metabolic resuscitator in septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The study aimed to compare the effect of thiamine and ascorbic acid (AA) on mortality, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, duration and dose of vasopressor support, and need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) in patients with septic shock with refractory hypotension. Methods: Consenting adult patients with septic shock and refractory hypotension were included in this study. Patients were divided into three groups: Group A received 100 ml of balanced salt solution 8 hourly, Group B received 2 mg/kg of thiamine 8 hourly, Group C received 25 mg/kg of AA 8 hourly intravenous (IV) for 72 h. All patients received IV infusion of hydrocortisone 200 mg/day for 72 h. Serum lactate, dose and duration of vasopressor support, SOFA score, need for RRT and hospital mortality were analyzed. Results: The SOFA Score was significantly lower in Group B than in Group A and C at 24, 48, and 72 h. Dosage of norepinephrine was lower in Group B at 66 h and after that, whereas in Groups A and C, it was comparable at all time points. Mortality in Group B was significantly lower but comparable in Groups A and C. The need for RRT was significantly lower in Group B (44%) compared to the control group (88%) but comparable in Group C (76%). Conclusion: In patients with septic shock treated with hydrocortisone, co-treatment with thiamine led to earlier correction of organ dysfunction, reduced need for RRT, and improved mortality compared to patients treated with AA or balanced salt solution. The addition of AA did not yield measurable benefits beyond hydrocortisone alone.
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.