Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38633478›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of critical care medicine2024

Systematic review with expert consensus on use of extracorporeal hemoadsorption in septic shock: An Indian perspective.

Yatin Mehta, Abdul Samad Ansari, Amit Kumar Mandal, Dipanjan Chatterjee, Gauri Shankar Sharma, Prachee Sathe, Purvesh V Umraniya, Rajib Paul, Sachin Gupta, Vinod Singh and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of critical care medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Retrospective evaluation of efficacy of CytoSorbWorld journal of critical care medicine · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

11 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Yatin MehtaInstitute of Critical Care and Anesthesiology, Medanta The Medicity, Gurgaon 122001, Haryana, India. yatinmehta@hotmail.com.
Abdul Samad AnsariDepartment of Critical Care, Nanavati Max Super Specialty Hospital, Mumbai 400065, India.
Amit Kumar MandalDepartment of Pulmonology, Sleep and Critical Care, Fortis Hospital, Mohali, Punjab, Mohali 160062, Punjab , India.
Dipanjan ChatterjeeDepartment of Cardio-Puimonary Critical Care, Medica Superspecialty Hospital, Kolkata 700099, India.
Gauri Shankar SharmaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Fortis Hospital, New Delhi 110070, India.
Prachee SatheDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, D.Y. Patil Medical College, Sant Tukaram Nagar, Pimpri Colony, Pimpri-Chinchwad,, Pune 411018, India.
Purvesh V UmraniyaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Bhailal Amin General Hospital, Vadodara 390003, Gujarat, India.
Rajib PaulDepartment of Internal Medicine, Apollo Hospitals, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 500 033, India.
Sachin GuptaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Narayana Superspeciality Hospital, Gurugram 122002, India.
Vinod SinghDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Institute of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Name - Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi 110001, India.
Yogendra Pal SinghDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Max Super Speciality Hospital, Delhi 110092, India.
Apollo Hospitals · INBhasha · INDr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital · INDr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre · INFortis Hospital · INFortis Hospital · INMax Super Speciality Hospital · INMedanta The Medicity · INNarayana Health · INNethradhama Superspeciality Eye Hospital · INSir Ganga Ram Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeptic shock is a severe form of sepsis characterised by deterioration in circulatory and cellular-metabolic parameters. Despite standard therapy, the outcomes are poor. Newer adjuvant therapy, such as CytoSorb

aimTo formulate/establish specific consensus statements on the use of CytoSorb

methodsWe performed a comprehensive literature on CytoSorb

resultsEleven expert members from critical care, emergency medicine, and the intensive care participated and voted on nine statements and one open-ended question. All 11 experts in the consensus group (100%) participated in the first, second and third round of voting. After three iterative voting rounds and adapting two statements, consensus was achieved on nine statements out of nine statements. The consensus expert panel also recognised the necessity to form an association or society that can keep a registry regarding the use of CytoSorb

conclusionThis Indian perspective consensus statement supports and provides guidance on the use of CytoSorb

Indexed as

ConsensusCytokineCytoSorbHemoadsorptionRefractorySepsisSeptic shock

Identifiers

PMID38633478
PMCPMC11019629
OpenAlexW4392572255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.