ArticleClinical epidemiology2023
Non-Selective Beta-Blockers and Risk of Sepsis in Patients with Cirrhosis and Ascites: Results from a Large Observational Study.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Previous studies have not been able to determine whether non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) reduce the risk of sepsis in cirrhosis. We aimed to examine this question with data from 1198 patients with cirrhosis and ascites included in clinical studies of satavaptan, a vasopressin receptor antagonist with no effect on infection risk. Methods: Risk of sepsis was estimated for NSBB users vs nonusers. Patients were examined every four weeks, or in relation to hospitalization, for the one-year duration of the trials. We computed the cumulative risk of sepsis for patients who did vs did not use NSBB at baseline. We used Cox regression to compare hazard rates of sepsis between current users and nonusers, accounting for changes in NSBB use over time. We adjusted for patient sex and age, MELD-Na score, albumin, use of antibiotics, use of proton pump inhibitors, cirrhosis etiology, history of variceal bleeding or SBP, severity of ascites and HE, HCC, other cancers, and diabetes, while stratifying on geographical region. Results: Of the 1198 patients, 54% used NSBB at some time. There were 56 sepsis episodes. The 1-year risk of sepsis was reduced to 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-8.6) in baseline NSBB users vs 11.6% (95% CI 7.0-15.9) in baseline nonusers. The hazard ratio of sepsis for current NSBB users vs current nonusers was reduced to 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8) and after adjustment to 0.7 (95% CI 0.4-1.3). Conclusion: NSBB use may reduce the risk of sepsis in patients with cirrhosis and ascites, but the precision of the estimate was limited by the number of episodes of sepsis.
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.