ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental hepatology
Immunosuppression in Liver Transplant Recipients in the Setting of Sepsis.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental hepatology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective Analysis of Risk Factors and Surgical Outcomes in Liver Transplant Recipients.Annals of transplantation · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning model for prediction of 28-day all-cause mortality in immunocompromised patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study based on MIMIC-IV database.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- The Science and Art of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyArticle
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Management of immunosuppression (IS) in liver transplant recipients in the setting of sepsis is an open stage for debate. The age-long practice of reduction or complete cessation of IS during sepsis has been followed by most centres across the world, although, their exact strategies are highly heterogeneous. On the other hand, the emergence of striking new evidence suggesting that there is, in fact, decreased mortality with the continuation of IS in sepsis, has raised doubts about our previously conceived intuitive notion that IS portends increased risk in sepsis. The theory postulated is that IS agents, perhaps reverse the state of dysregulated immune response in sepsis to that of an iatrogenically modulated immune response, thus dimming the inflammatory cascade and preventing its deleterious effects. Of note, none of these studies reported exaggerated rejection-related complications. These contrasting outlooks have made it rather onerous to formulate an evidence-based recommendation for liver transplant recipients afflicted with sepsis. Inclusion of transplanted patients in randomised controlled trials of sepsis-related interventions seems to be the need of the hour.
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.