ReviewCureus2026
Utility of a Peripheral Intravenous Catheter for Administration of Vasopressors: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Vasopressors are the cornerstone of the management of shock, a life-threatening condition characterized by inadequate tissue perfusion, with risks of organ failure and death. Prompt initiation of vasopressors restores hemodynamic stability and prevents shock sequelae. Vasopressors have long been administered via central venous catheters (CVCs) due to concerns about extravasation and tissue injury with peripheral venous administration. However, CVC placement is an invasive, time-consuming procedure requiring specialized personnel and resources, potentially delaying the initiation of life-saving medications. With the 'time to management' being a detrimental factor in shock, there has been a renewed interest in peripheral vasopressor therapy, particularly in emergent or resource-limited settings where complications and delays exceed expectations. Over the last decade, multiple observational studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of peripheral vasopressor administration, especially when using large-bore catheters placed in proximal upper extremity veins and under vigilant monitoring. Early initiation of vasopressors via peripheral venous access has been associated with faster attainment of target mean arterial pressure and shorter time to hemodynamic stabilization, without increased mortality or severe complications. Prompt recognition and management of extravasation, including the use of phentolamine, further mitigates risks. Guidelines suggest starting vasopressors peripherally to avoid delays, with a transition to central access if prolonged infusion is anticipated. Institutional protocols, including site selection, catheter type, infusion duration, and escalation criteria, are essential to optimize safety. Further research is needed to refine protocols and address remaining knowledge gaps regarding prolonged use and optimal catheter selection.
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.