ArticleShock (Augusta, Ga.)2026
Nutritional Status-Based Model for Predicting Low-Lactate Shock: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Shock (Augusta, Ga.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Nonlinear correlation between lactate levels and 28-day all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS): a retrospective study based on the MIMIC-IV database.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough Sepsis-3.0 defines septic shock as hypotension with serum lactate levels >2.0 mmol/L, this criterion may miss low-lactate shock: a clinically significant phenotype characterized by hypotension but without elevated lactate levels. The epidemiological characteristics and prognostic significance of low-lactate shock remain unclear, highlighting a critical gap in current shock management models.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 3,134 patients with shock admitted to a tertiary care medical institution from January 2015 to March 2022. We used propensity score matching (1:2 ratio) to control for confounding factors, aiming to determine the prevalence of low-lactate shock (lactate ≤ 2.0 mmol/L), identify risk factors through multivariable logistic regression, and validate the predictive model [Nutritional Risk Screening-2002-Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-Triglycerides-Total Bilirubin (NRS-APACHE II-TG-TBIL)] using receiver operating characteristic analysis.
resultsThe 28-day mortality rate was slightly lower in the low-lactate shock group compared with the high-lactate group [25.4% (94/369) vs. 35.8% (990/2,765), respectively]. The age, Nutritional Risk Screening-2002 (NRS-2002) score, and venous thromboembolism risk score were significantly lower in the low-lactate shock group than in the high-lactate shock group ( P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in gender distribution ( P = 0.092). Multivariable analysis identified four independent predictors of low-lactate shock: NRS-2002 [odds ratio (OR) = 0.570, P < 0.001], Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) (OR = 0.869, P < 0.001), triglycerides (OR = 0.772, P = 0.035), and total bilirubin (OR = 0.993, P = 0.002). The composite NRS-APACHE II-TG-TBIL model showed excellent discrimination (area under curve = 0.800, P < 0.001) with balanced sensitivity (72.6%) and specificity (73.5%).
conclusionsLow-lactate shock carries substantial mortality risk (25.4%). The validated NRS-APACHE II-TG-TBIL model (area under curve = 0.800) provides an effective tool for early detection, addressing critical diagnostic gaps in 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.