ArticleCritical care (London, England)2024
Differential effects of thiamine and ascorbic acid in clusters of septic patients identified by latent variable analysis.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThiamine and ascorbic acid have been proposed to mitigate the devastating consequences of sepsis and septic shock. To date, randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate a benefit of these therapies and heterogeneity of treatment effect is suspected. In this study, we aimed at assessing the heterogeneity of treatment effect of thiamine (B1) and the combination of B1 plus ascorbic acid (AA + B1) in critically ill patients with sepsis.
methodsWe conducted a bi-centric retrospective cohort study. All adult patients admitted to the ICU with sepsis or septic shock between January 2012 and August 2022 were included. Patient clusters were identified using latent variable analysis based on demographics and physiological variables obtained within 24 h of admission. Within each cluster and using inverse probability weighted Cox models, we compared in-hospital mortality between patients who received standard treatment (control), standard treatment plus B1 (B1 group), and standard treatment plus a combination of thiamine and ascorbic acid (AA + B1 group).
resultsA total of 3465 septic patients were included, 2183, 1054 and 228 in the standard, B1 and AA + B1 groups respectively. Five clusters of patients were identified in an unsupervised manner. The "Cluster Severe" included the most severely ill patients, the "Cluster Resp" patients presented with predominantly respiratory failure, the "Cluster Old" included elderly patients with multiple comorbidities, the "Cluster Fit" patients were young, healthy with low severity indices and "Cluster Liver" included patients with predominant liver failure. B1 treatment was associated with different outcomes across the five clusters. It was associated with a lower in-hospital mortality in the "Cluster Severe" and "Cluster Resp". On the other hand, the combination of thiamine and ascorbic acid was not associated with reduced mortality in any cluster but an increased mortality in"Cluster Old".
conclusionsThese results reinforce the lack of efficacy of the combination of AA + B1 reported in recent trials and even raise concerns about potential harm in older patients with comorbidities. On the contrary, we reported improved ICU survival associated with B1 supplementation in the most severe patients and those with predominant respiratory failure, supporting the need for further trials in this specific population.
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.