ReviewCritical care (London, England)2023
Extending the 'host response' paradigm from sepsis to cardiogenic shock: evidence, limitations and opportunities.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Infections following temporary mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock: Incidence, associations, and outcomes.JHLT open · 2026Article
- From Spatial Epigenomes to Clinical Diagnostics: Integrative Methylomics Across Scales and Modalities.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Mechanistic Elucidation of Liujun Jiaoxian Tang in Management of Sepsis Through Metabolomics and Network Pharmacology.Biomedical engineering and computational biology · 2026Article
- Inflammatory Profile and Risk of Post-Intervention Infection in Relation to Myocardial Necrosis Markers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cardiogenic shock syndrome unraveled: understanding the different layers of heterogeneity.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
- Cardiogenic shock: diagnosis, phenotyping and management.Intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- Anti-inflammatory interventions in coronary artery disease: antipodal responses requiring targeted therapeutic strategies.Basic research in cardiology · 2025Review
- Endotoxin removal by the OXIRIS filter for cardiogenic shock requiring veno-arterial extra-corporeal life support: the ECMORIX randomized controlled trial.Annals of intensive care · 2025Article
- Why Molecular Subphenotyping Is Needed in Cardiogenic Shock and How to Accomplish This.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- Identifying biomarker-driven subphenotypes of cardiogenic shock: analysis of prospective cohorts and randomized controlled trials.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- A novel approach to studying infective endocarditis: Ultrasound-guided wire injury and bacterial challenge in mice.PloS one · 2025Article
- Mixed Cardiogenic-Vasodilatory Shock: Current Insights and Future Directions.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
- Management of cardiogenic shock: state-of-the-art.Intensive care medicine · 2024Review
- Biomarkers in cardiogenic shock: old pals, new friends.Annals of intensive care · 2024Review
- The Role of Inflammation in the Pathogenesis of Cardiogenic Shock Secondary to Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Narrative Review.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Early physical rehabilitation dosage in the intensive care unit associates with hospital outcomes after critical COVID-19.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- Early physical rehabilitation dosage in the IntensiveCare Unit predicts hospital outcomes after criticalCOVID-19.Research square · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Recent clinical and research efforts in cardiogenic shock (CS) have largely focussed on the restoration of the low cardiac output state that is the conditio sine qua non of the clinical syndrome. This approach has failed to translate into improved outcomes, and mortality has remained static at 30-50%. There is an unmet need to better delineate the pathobiology of CS to understand the observed heterogeneity of presentation and treatment effect and to identify novel therapeutic targets. Despite data in other critical illness syndromes, specifically sepsis, the role of dysregulated inflammation and immunity is hitherto poorly described in CS. High-dimensional molecular profiling, particularly through leukocyte transcriptomics, may afford opportunity to better characterise subgroups of patients with shared mechanisms of immune dysregulation. In this state-of-the-art review, we outline the rationale for considering molecular subtypes of CS. We describe how high-dimensional molecular technologies can be used to identify these subtypes, and whether they share biological features with sepsis and other critical illness states. Finally, we propose how the identification of molecular subtypes of patients may enrich future clinical trial design and identification of novel therapies for CS.
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.