ReviewCureus2025
Efficacy and Safety of Landiolol in the Treatment of Tachycardia in Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
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.
- Landiolol in perioperative and critical care: evidence, patient selection, and practical titration for targeted heart rate control: a narrative review.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2026Review
- Effects of early use of norepinephrine combined with esmolol on hemodynamic stability and 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Landiolol is being investigated for its potential to manage septic shock (SS) and sepsis-related tachyarrhythmias (TA). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 473 patients with sepsis or SS, including those with TA, comparing landiolol to standard therapy-controlled (STC) groups. Standard therapy consisted of usual sepsis care ± placebo but excluded β-blockers in the control arms. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for trial data extracted from published reports up to November 2024, excluding non-English reports. Quality assessment was performed per Cochrane recommendations. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled across trials to evaluate the outcomes. The primary endpoints included heart rate (HR) at 96 hours, chosen because all three trials consistently recorded HR at this time point, allowing for uniform comparison despite additional time points being reported, and 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included atrial fibrillation (AF), hypotension, changes in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, and norepinephrine dose. Of the three RCTs, 473 patients were included, with an intervention-to-control arm ratio of approximately 1:1. A lower HR (MD: -6.36; 95% CI: -9.25, -3.47; p < 0.0001; I² = 0%) was observed in the landiolol group compared to the STC. Hypotension (RR: 3.62, 95% CI: 1.37, 9.58; p = 0.010; I² = 5%) was significantly increased in patients who received landiolol when compared to STC, and 28-day mortality showed no significant difference between the groups (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.58; p = 0.74; I² = 44%), as did AF (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.25, 1.59; p = 0.33; I² = 8%). Landiolol, a highly selective ultrashort-acting β1-blocker with distinct pharmacokinetic properties from esmolol, reduces HR in patients with sepsis-related TA without significantly affecting 28-day mortality. However, careful monitoring for hypotension is advised, given the absolute risk increase of 8.4% observed in treated patients. However, results should be interpreted cautiously as only three small trials underpin these results. To our knowledge, this is the first MA to focus exclusively on landiolol in this setting, offering drug-specific insights for critical care 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.