Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38094120›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023

Vasopressors and inotropes in cardiogenic shock patients: an analysis of the MIMIC-IV database.

Bryan Richard Sasmita, ChuanYing Wang, Siyuan Xie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Vasoactive Agents in Burn Patients: Perspectives on Angiotensin-II.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bryan Richard SasmitaDepartment of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
ChuanYing WangDepartment of Medical Administration, The Sixth People's Hospital of Chongqing, Chongqing, China.
Siyuan XieDepartment of Medical Administration, The Sixth People's Hospital of Chongqing, Chongqing, China.
The Sixth People's Hospital of Shenyang · CNChongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Pharmacological support has become the mainstay therapy in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). Unfortunately, the clinical benefits of such potent drugs remain unclear, therefore, the present study aims to elucidate the safety and efficacy of vasoactive agents in CS patients. Methods: Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) IV databases were used for this retrospective study. The primary outcome of this study was 30-day all-cause mortality. The subgroup analysis of was the relationship between the combined use of vasopressors and inotropes and 30-day all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 2,216 patients diagnosed with CS were enrolled in this study. The non-survivors group was more likely to be older, presented with chronic kidney disease, have a lower systolic blood pressure, lower heart rate, and higher respiratory rate (all Conclusions: Using vasopressors/inotropes agents was associated with a higher risk of 30-day all-cause mortality in CS patients. In addition, only milrinone was associated with a better prognosis among the available vasoactive agents.

Indexed as

30-day mortalitycardiogenic shockinotropespharmacological supportvasopressors

Identifiers

PMID38094120
PMCPMC10716269
OpenAlexW4389150399

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.