ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Shengmai Injection as adjunctive therapy in sepsis and septic shock: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sepsis and septic shock constitute critical global health burdens associated with substantial mortality. Shengmai Injection (SMI), a classic traditional Chinese medicine formulation endowed with anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties, has demonstrated efficacy as an adjunctive therapy in critical illness. Nevertheless, high-level clinical evidence supporting its routine application remains limited. This work sought to systematically explore the therapeutic efficacy of adjunctive SMI intervention in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Materials and methods: Mass spectrometry was employed to identify chemical constituents of SMI. This multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolled patients meeting Sepsis 3.0 diagnostic criteria for sepsis or septic shock at the Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from February 2016 to June 2024. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) to balance baseline confounders, clinical outcomes were compared between the SMI and control groups. The primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, ventilation and fever duration, and changes in SOFA score, APACHE II scores, procalcitonin (PCT), lactate, and blood cell counts at days 3-7 post-treatment. A subgroup analysis was further conducted among patients with septic shock. Results: A total of 130 components were identified in SMI. The retrospective study involving 436 enrolled patients (136 in the septic shock subgroup) showed that SMI shortened ICU stay, ventilation duration, and fever duration, and reduced post-treatment SOFA, APACHE II scores, PCT, platelet count, and lactate levels. Cox regression analysis revealed that post-treatment SOFA score (HR = 1.133), PCT (HR = 1.024), lactate (HR = 1.432), and SMI course (HR = 0.830) were independent predictors of 28-day mortality. Subgroup analysis of 72 patients with septic shock demonstrated that SMI reduced invasive ventilation duration, improved post-treatment SOFA and APACHE II scores, and decreased platelet and lactate levels. However, SMI did not significantly reduce 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock. Conclusion: Adjunctive SMI therapy was associated with certain beneficial physiological effects, including improvements in inflammatory and metabolic markers and organ function, without conferring a significant survival benefit regarding 28-day mortality. Post-treatment PCT and lactate levels serve as powerful prognostic biomarkers for disease progression. Further prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are required to corroborate these observations and consolidate clinical evidence.
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.