Trial reportAnnals of medicine2025
Effects of adjunctive milrinone versus placebo on hemodynamics in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05122884 (Effect of Milrinone Versus Placebo on Hemodynamics in Patients With Septic Shock; Randomized Control Trial), which is not on this 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.
Effect of Milrinone Versus Placebo on Hemodynamics in Patients With Septic Shock; Randomized Control Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of milrinone combined with norepinephrine in improving hemodynamics and protecting liver/kidney function in patients with septic shock.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2026.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Refractory septic shock: our updated pragmatic approach.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2026Review
- Therapeutical progress in sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Letter to the editor regarding "effects of adjunctive milrinone versus placebo on hemodynamics in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled trial".Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Point of View: A Holistic Four-Interface Conceptual Model for Personalizing Shock Resuscitation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
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
backgroundRefractory septic shock can lead to multiorgan failure and death due to myocardial dysfunction-induced inadequate tissue perfusion. Current guidelines advocate inotropic adjuncts to norepinephrine, but the efficacy of milrinone remains understudied in this context. This study aimed to evaluate the hemodynamic changes in septic shock patients treated with adjunctive milrinone compared to those treated with a placebo.
methodsThis multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial enrolled adults with septic shock, adequate fluid resuscitation, and a mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mmHg. Eligible patients exhibited poor tissue perfusion or impaired left ventricular systolic function. Participants were randomized 1:1 to milrinone or placebo. Echocardiographic hemodynamic assessments were performed pre- and postintervention. The primary outcome was the change in cardiac output from baseline to 6 h after drug administration. The study was prospectively registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05122884).
resultsAmong 271 screened patients, 64 were randomized. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. The milrinone group demonstrated a significantly greater change in cardiac output at 6 h (median [IQR] 0.62 L/min [-0.51 to 1.47]) than did the placebo group (0.13 L/min [-0.59 to 0.46];
conclusionsMilrinone administration in septic shock patients improved cardiac output at 6 h, suggesting a potential benefit for patients with persistent tissue hypoperfusion despite norepinephrine.
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.