Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39816212›Full record

ReviewBurns & trauma2025

Haemodynamic management of septic shock.

Yuki Kotani, Nicholas Ryan, Andrew A Udy, Tomoko Fujii

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Burns & trauma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Refractory septic shock: our updated pragmatic approach.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

4 authors.

Yuki KotaniDepartment of Intensive Care, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa City, Chiba 296-8602, Japan.
Nicholas RyanDepartment of Intensive Care & Hyperbaric Medicine, The Alfred, 55 Commercial Rd, Melbourne VIC 3004, Australia.
Andrew A UdyDepartment of Intensive Care & Hyperbaric Medicine, The Alfred, 55 Commercial Rd, Melbourne VIC 3004, Australia.
Tomoko FujiiAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care-Research Centre, Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3854-4081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Septic shock is a significant challenge in the management of patients with burns and traumatic injuries when complicated by infection, necessitating prompt and effective haemodynamic support. This review provides a comprehensive overview of current strategies for vasopressor and fluid management in septic shock, with the aim to optimize patient outcomes. With regard to vasopressor management, we elaborate on the pharmacologic profiles and clinical applications of catecholamines, vasopressin derivatives, angiotensin II, and other vasoactive agents. Noradrenaline remains central to septic shock management. The addition of vasopressin, when sequentially added to noradrenaline, offers a non-catecholaminergic vasoactive effect with some clinical benefits and risks of adverse effects. Emerging agents such as angiotensin II and hydroxocobalamin are highlighted for their roles in catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. Next, for fluid management, crystalloids are currently preferred for initial resuscitation, with balanced crystalloids showing benefits over saline. The application of albumin in septic shock warrants further research. High-quality evidence does not support large-volume fluid resuscitation, and an individualized strategy based on haemodynamic parameters, including lactate clearance and capillary refill time, is recommended. The existing knowledge suggests that early vasopressor initiation, particularly noradrenaline, may be critical in cases where fluid resuscitation takes inadequate effect. Management of refractory septic shock remains challenging, with novel agents like angiotensin II and methylene blue showing potential in recent studies. In conclusion, Further research is needed to optimize haemodynamic management of septic shock, particularly in developing novel vasopressor usage and fluid management approaches.

Indexed as

HaemodynamicManagementSepsisShock

Identifiers

PMID39816212
PMCPMC11735046

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.