Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41367438›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

General Ondansetron Exposure and ICU Outcomes: A Comprehensive Analysis of 85,229 Critically Ill Adults Using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV).

Rohan Muchintala, Shabaaz M Baig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Rohan MuchintalaAnesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Rutgers University New Jersey Medical School, Newark, USA.
Shabaaz M BaigAnesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Rutgers University New Jersey Medical School, Newark, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Nausea and vomiting are frequent in critically ill patients and complicate airway safety, medication delivery, and nutrition. Ondansetron is widely used for symptom control, yet its effect on survival in the intensive care unit (ICU) is unclear. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Adult ICU admissions from 2008-2019 were stratified by receipt of ondansetron. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes included ICU length of stay (LOS) and a pragmatic readmission proxy. Analyses included Welch's t-tests, chi-square tests, multivariable logistic regression, prespecified subgroup analyses, and 1:1 propensity score-matching. Results Among 85,229 ICU admissions, 40,205 received ondansetron and 45,024 did not. Mortality was lower with ondansetron than without (9.1% vs 12.9%, p < 0.001). After adjustment, ondansetron was associated with lower odds of death (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.69-0.75). In a 1:1 propensity-matched cohort of 31,221 patients per group, mortality remained lower with ondansetron (11.3% vs 14.6%; OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.71-0.78). Ondansetron did not shorten ICU LOS. Conclusions Ondansetron exposure during ICU admission was independently associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. These findings suggest a potential survival benefit of a commonly used, well-tolerated antiemetic and support further prospective evaluation of ondansetron as an adjunctive therapy in critical care.

Indexed as

critical carein-hospital mortalityintensive care unitondansetronpharmacotherapy

Identifiers

PMID41367438
PMCPMC12683186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.