ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2024
Use of Epinephrine in Cardiac Arrest: Advances and Future Challenges.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Screening the Tox21 Compound Library for Chemicals That Stimulate the Adrenergic β1 Receptor.Chemical research in toxicology · 2026Article
- Nontechnical Skills and Leadership Are Associated With More Efficient Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Deployment in Real-World Cardiac Arrest.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Observational
- Potential association between chronic alpha-1 adrenergic blockade and early epinephrine-related resuscitation profiles during cardiac arrest: a retrospective exploratory cohort study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Key physiological indicators and technological trends in physiology-directed cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A narrative review.Resuscitation plus · 2026Review
- Intramuscular epinephrine in cardiac arrest: A systematic review.Resuscitation plus · 2025Review
- The effects of norepinephrine in shockable cardiac arrest, a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epinephrine is the most common medication used in cardiac arrest. Although the medication has been a mainstay of treatment over the last century, the utility and efficacy of epinephrine has been re-evaluated in recent years. This study aims to evaluate the literature describing the efficacy, timing, and dosing of epinephrine use in cardiac arrest. We utilized an extensive PubMed and SCOPUS search that included randomized control trials, prospective observational studies, and secondary analysis of observational data. These articles evaluated the administration of epinephrine in cardiac arrest and reported patient outcomes, including survival rates, neurological function, and return of spontaneous circulation. Dosing of epinephrine has been standardized at 1 mg per administration in adults and studies show that higher doses may not have better outcomes and can potentially be harmful. Research on the optimal timing of epinephrine has shown that earlier administration of epinephrine in cardiac arrest is more likely to have improved outcomes compared to later administration and longer intervals, although there are still conflicting results on the improvement of neurological outcomes. Intravenous is the preferred route of administration for epinephrine, but new research suggests intramuscular administration may be beneficial. While epinephrine has been shown to improve the rates of return of spontaneous circulation and even survival to hospital discharge in several studies, epinephrine use may not provide patients who survive cardiac arrest with a meaningful neurological recovery.
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.