ArticleCureus2025
Infective Endocarditis in Septic Shock: Results From an Observational Multicenter Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Infective endocarditis complicated by shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Heart failure reviews · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Infective endocarditis (IE) in patients with septic shock poses diagnostic challenges due to overlapping systemic effects and comorbidities, making early recognition crucial for improving outcomes. This study aimed to characterize the clinical features, diagnostic findings, and outcomes of IE in septic shock to inform better early recognition and management strategies in emergency and critical care settings. Methodology A multicenter observational study was conducted across three tertiary care hospitals in Pakistan over two years, involving 300 patients presenting with septic shock and confirmed IE. Adults aged 18 years or older who met the Sepsis-3 criteria and were diagnosed with IE using the modified Duke criteria were included. Data collected included demographics, clinical characteristics, imaging results, blood cultures, inflammatory markers, treatment plans, and outcomes (e.g., mortality, embolic events, ICU admission). Multivariate analysis identified independent predictors of adverse outcomes, adjusting for confounders such as age and comorbidities. Missing data were addressed using multiple imputations, which allows for the creation of several plausible datasets to account for uncertainty and minimize bias. This method was selected over simpler approaches, such as mean or median imputation, to enhance the robustness of our findings. Results The mean age was 55.20 ± 14.70 years, the incidence of echocardiographic positivity was 96.33% (n=289), and blood culture positivity was 92.67% (n=278). At admission, patients exhibited varying degrees of septic shock severity based on hemodynamic instability, with hypotension (83.33%) being a prominent feature. Fever (90%) and dyspnea (60%) were among the most frequently reported symptoms. Diagnostic challenges were encountered in 12% of cases, where initial differential diagnoses excluded IE but were later revised based on echocardiographic and microbiological confirmation. Pathogens predominantly included
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.