ReviewCureus2025
Targeting Inflammation After Hemorrhagic Shock as a Molecular and Experimental Journey to Improve Outcomes: A Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limited Utility of the CALLY Index in Enhancing Mortality Prediction for Trauma Patients in Intensive Care Units: A Retrospective Analysis.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Acute effects of guanosine or inosine in a porcine model of hemorrhagic shock.Purinergic signalling · 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
Abstract
Hemorrhagic shock continues to be a major contributor to trauma-related fatalities globally, posing a significant and intricate pathophysiological challenge. The condition is marked by injury and blood loss, which activate molecular cascades that can quickly become harmful. The inflammatory response exhibits a biphasic pattern, beginning with a hyper-inflammatory phase that transitions into immunosuppression, posing significant obstacles to effective therapeutic interventions. This review article explores the intricate molecular mechanisms driving inflammation in hemorrhagic shock, emphasizing cellular signaling pathways, endothelial dysfunction, and immune activation. We discuss the role of molecular biomarkers in tracking disease progression and stratifying risk, with a focus on markers of endothelial dysfunction and inflammatory mediators as potential prognostic tools. Additionally, we assess therapeutic strategies, spanning traditional approaches like hemostatic resuscitation to advanced immunomodulatory treatments. Despite promising advancements in molecular monitoring and targeted therapies, challenges persist in bridging experimental findings with clinical applications. Future efforts must prioritize understanding the dynamic progression of inflammatory pathways and refining the timing of interventions to improve outcomes in hemorrhagic shock management.
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.