ArticleCritical care (London, England)2025
Vasopressin use across shock states: international insights from an international ESICM-endorsed survey: the PRESS Survey.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07453901 (The Multicentre Prospective Observational Study on the Management of Septic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
The Multicentre Prospective Observational Study on the Management of Septic Shock (Observational Study on Septic Shock, the OSS Study)
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current and future strategies aiming at reducing catecholamine exposure in septic shock.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- FIRST-ICU: forecasting interventions and risk stratification in the ICU using graph neural network autoencoders.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- An interpretable early intensive care unit model for predicting in-hospital mortality in trauma patients combined with rib fractures: development and external validation.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Clinical criteria for the definition of refractory septic shock: a joint Delphi consensus from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM).Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of norepinephrine with a combined non-catecholaminergic therapy in a porcine model of refractory cardiac arrest resuscitated with VA-ECMO.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Milrinone and levosimendan improve microvascular perfusion in septic rats: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Modulation of the Vasopressin System in Distributive and Cardiogenic Shock: Theoretical Principles and Practical Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- When should we start vasopressin in septic shock? Revisiting an old question.Journal of intensive medicine · 2026Article
- Management of arterial hypotension in critically Ill children: a narrative review and practical approach.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Current standard of care for septic shock.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- It's Time to Consider How We Should Use Vasopressors, Rather Than Just Which We Should Use.Critical care explorations · 2025Article
- Rising burden of subarachnoid hemorrhage linked to high systolic blood pressure among young and middle-aged populations: temporal trends and global implication.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVasopressin is currently suggested as a second-line vasopressor in patients with septic shock and persistent arterial hypotension. This survey aimed to assess the current use of vasopressin and terlipressin in patients with septic shock.
methodsAn international survey endorsed by the European Society of the Intensive Care Medicine. All items addressed the different areas of uncertainty and research identified from current international recommendations.
results1919 intensivists from 124 countries responded to the survey: 1220(64%) worked in Europe, 1430(74%) in high and upper-middle income level countries and 916(48%) in academic ICUs. Vasopressin or terlipressin were available to 1830(95%) respondents. The main reported indications were refractory septic shock, catecholamine sparing in all types of refractory shock, refractory vasoplegic shock (other than septic) without reduced left ventricular systolic function and septic shock with high cardiac output and low systemic vascular resistance (73%,53%,51% and 49% of respondents, respectively). The main reported contraindications were non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia and digital or skin ischemia. Overall, 1506(78%) respondents used vasopressin or terlipressin, 93% of them as a second-line vasopressor after initial resuscitation, mainly to increase blood pressure and reduce the catecholamine load. The dose of norepinephrine alone or the duration of norepinephrine administration alone triggered vasopressin and terlipressin initiation for 98% and 53% of respondents, respectively: the most frequent dose of norepinephrine base was 0.25-0.50 µg/kg/min and the most frequent duration was > 2-6 h. The combination of the dose of norepinephrine base and the duration of its administration triggered vasopressin and terlipressin initiation for 78% of respondents, the most frequent combination being a norepinephrine base dose > 0.25 or > 0.50 µg/kg/min for > 2-6 h. An initial dose of vasopressin of 0.01 or 0.03 U/min was used by 50% of respondents. The mean arterial pressure level triggered the tapering of vasopressin or terlipressin for 88% of respondents. Discontinuation started after the dose of the first-line vasopressor had been lowered below a predefined threshold for 43% of respondents and was progressive for 89% of respondents.
conclusionsVasopressin is commonly used to treat patients with septic shock, but its handling (doses and discontinuation practices) remains heterogeneous, indicating the need for guidance in its clinical use.
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.