GuidelineIntensive care medicine2025
ESICM guidelines on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring 2025.
Guideline in Intensive care medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 65 papers, 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.
The Multicentre Prospective Observational Study on the Management of Septic Shock (Observational Study on Septic Shock, the OSS Study)
Cardiovascular Outcomes Registry in Cardiogenic SHOCK
Who cites it
65 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Agreement of minimally invasive pulse wave analysis with pulmonary artery and transpulmonary thermodilution cardiac output measurements in perioperative and intensive care medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Pooled it
- Haemodynamic effects of selective venoconstriction with centhaquine in spontaneously breathing patients with mixed hypovolaemic-vasodilatory shock.Experimental physiology · 2026Trial
- State-of-the-art review: ß-blockade in critical illness.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Disparities in the management of cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a questionnaire survey in Beijing.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Beyond macrocirculatory targets: a multimodal framework for microcirculatory and organ perfusion monitoring in sepsis.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Venous dimension of shock: Integrating arterial inflow and venous back-pressure in hemodynamic assessment.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Cardiac index modifies the association between blood pressure response index and 28-day mortality in sepsis.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Heart-lung interactions in ARDS: practical bedside implications.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- ARDS management in trauma patients.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Beyond the numbers: hypotension, algorithms, and the elusive promise of renal protection.Annals of translational medicine · 2026Article
- The ultrasound gap in de-resuscitation trials: A systematic review of physiological assessment deficits.The ultrasound journal · 2026Article
- Mini fluid challenge versus passive leg raising test for predicting fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing children.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Vasoplegia in Cardiac Surgery and Mechanical Circulatory Support: From Cardiopulmonary Bypass to Advanced Circulatory Support Devices.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Use of landiolol in septic shock patients with new onset of atrial fibrillation: a European Delphi consensus.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Hour-1 Sepsis Bundle: Updated Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Cardiac Surgery Management in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- The OxyCam: A novel hand-held vital microscope for quantitative measurement of microcirculatory perfusion and oxygenation.Journal of intensive medicine · 2026Article
- Pathophysiology of distributive shock in sepsis: beyond vasoplegia.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Developing a comprehensive haemodynamic ultrasound assessment for critical care: Rationale and methodology from the FUSIC programme.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2026Article
- Acute pulmonary embolism: clinical and echocardiographic recognition of normotensive shock.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThese European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) guidelines provide recommendations for the diagnosis of shock and hemodynamic monitoring for adult critically ill patients.
methodsAn international panel of experts formulated PICO-formatted questions, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was applied to assess evidence and formulate recommendations. In the absence of strong evidence, panelists issued ungraded good practice statements (UGPS).
resultsPanelists issued 50 statements. Among others, skin perfusion should be monitored using the assessment of capillary refill time, and this may be complemented by the assessment of skin temperature and mottling (UGPS). In patients with a central venous catheter, serial measurements of (central) venous oxygen saturation and of the veno-arterial difference in carbon dioxide partial pressure should be performed (UGPS). In patients with persistent shock after initial fluid resuscitation, fluid responsiveness should be assessed before continuing fluid resuscitation (UGPS). It is recommended to use dynamic variables over static markers of preload for predicting fluid responsiveness, when applicable (graded statement). Cardiac output (CO) and/or stroke volume should be monitored in patients who do not respond to initial therapy (UGPS). Arterial pressure should be monitored with an arterial catheter in shock that is not responsive to initial therapy and/or requiring vasopressor infusion (UGPS), and central venous pressure should be measured in patients who have a central venous catheter (UGPS). Panelists suggest using echocardiography as the first-line imaging modality to assess the type of shock (graded statement). Echocardiographically defined phenotypes of left and right ventricular dysfunction may be of prognostic significance (UGPS).
conclusionsThe panel made 50 recommendations on shock diagnosis and hemodynamic monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41236566What 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.