ReviewEuropean journal of medical research2024
Early peripheral perfusion monitoring in septic shock.
Review in European journal of medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- ARISE framework: a temporal, multi-organ view of perfusion in sepsis.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Mas receptor activation regulates the functional phenotype of myocardial macrophages through the Akt/Nrf2 signaling pathway to alleviate sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- The Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Clinical Implications of Fluid Resuscitation in Critically Ill Patients.Cureus · 2026Review
- Organ Support Requirements as Markers of Disease Severity and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Septic Cardiomyopathy: Age-Dependent Physiology and Hemodynamic Aspects-A Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Key strategies in trauma anesthesia for severe hemorrhage: a narrative review.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2026Review
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Septic shock is a frequent critical clinical condition and a leading cause of death in critically ill individuals. However, it is challenging to identify affected patients early. In this article, we discuss new perspectives on the methods and uses of peripheral perfusion monitoring, considering the concept of a dysregulated response. Physical examination, and visual and ultrasonographic techniques are used to measure peripheral microcirculatory blood flow to reflect tissue perfusion. Compared with other monitoring techniques, peripheral perfusion monitoring has the benefits of low invasiveness and good repeatability, and allows for quick therapeutic judgments, which have significant practical relevance. Peripheral perfusion monitoring is an effective tool to detect early signs of septic shock, autonomic dysfunction, and organ damage. This method can also be used to evaluate treatment effectiveness, direct fluid resuscitation and the use of vasoactive medications, and monitor vascular reactivity, microcirculatory disorders, and endothelial cell damage. Recent introductions of novel peripheral perfusion monitoring methods, new knowledge of peripheral perfusion kinetics, and multimodal peripheral perfusion evaluation methods have occurred. To investigate new knowledge and therapeutic implications, we examined the methodological attributes and mechanisms of peripheral perfusion monitoring, in this study.
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.