Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37228404›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023

Association of mortality with fludrocortisone addition to hydrocortisone treatment among septic shock patients: a propensity score matching analysis.

Xiaoxiao Cheng, Zhiqin Fu, Yiting Liu, Xiaoyu Zheng, Tianyang Hu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Mineralocorticoid magic? Evaluating fludrocortisone in septic shock.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026
    Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaoxiao ChengDepartment of Ultrasound, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Ultrasound Molecular Imaging, Institute of Ultrasound Imaging, Chongqing, China.
Zhiqin FuDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Anyue Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Second Ziyang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Ziyang, China.
Yiting LiuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Xiaoyu ZhengSchool of Clinical Medicine, Chongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Chongqing, China.
Tianyang HuPrecision Medicine Center, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Chongqing Medical University · CNAnyang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNChongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Several clinical trials of corticosteroids have been carried out in the treatment of septic shock, however, the therapeutic effect of the most widely used hydrocortisone is still controversial, and no studies have directly compared hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for patients with septic shock. Methods: Baseline characteristics and treatment regimens of patients with septic shock treated with hydrocortisone from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-IV database were collected. Patients were divided into hydrocortisone treatment groups and hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone treatment groups. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality, and secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Binomial Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality. Survival analysis was performed and Kaplan-Meier curves were drawn for patients in different treatment groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to reduce bias. Results: Six hundred and fifty three patients were enrolled, of which 583 were treated with hydrocortisone alone, and 70 with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone. After PSM, 70 patients were included in each group. The proportion of patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) and the proportion of renal replacement therapy (RRT) treatment in the hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone group were higher than those in the hydrocortisone alone group, and there was no significant difference in other baseline characteristics. Compared with hydrocortisone alone, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone did not reduce the 90-day mortality (after PSM, relative risk/RR = 1.07, 95%CI 0.75-1.51), 28-day mortality (after PSM, RR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.59-1.14) and in-hospital mortality (after PSM, RR = 0.79, 95%CI 0.57-1.11) of the enrolled patients, nor did it affect the length of hospital stay (after PSM, 13.9 days vs. 10.9 days, Conclusion: In the treatment of patients with septic shock, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone did not reduce 90-day mortality, 28-day mortality, and in-hospital mortality compared with hydrocortisone alone, and had no effect on the length of hospital stay and ICU stay.

Indexed as

corticosteroidfludrocortisonehydrocortisonemortalityseptic shock

Identifiers

PMID37228404
PMCPMC10203469
OpenAlexW4378347402

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.