ArticleBMJ open2026
Role of bacterial pathogens and toxins in sepsis-related myocardial injury: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo map and synthesise human and experimental literature examining associations between specific bacterial pathogens or toxins and myocardial injury in adult sepsis and to evaluate whether the available evidence supports pathogen-specific mechanisms of myocardial injury.
designScoping review conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidance. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase and Web of Science were searched from inception to December 2024, with an updated search in December 2025. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies of adults (≥18 years) with sepsis, experimentally induced bacteraemia or experimentally induced endotoxaemia were included if they reported myocardial injury associated with microbiologically identified bacterial pathogens and/or specific toxins. Myocardial injury was defined by circulating cardiac biomarkers and/or histopathological evidence. Animal-only studies were excluded. Only studies published in English were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form. Findings were synthesised descriptively according to pathogen, study design, methods used to identify myocardial injury and reported cardiac findings.
results17 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 173 clinical patients from three observational cohort studies and 13 case reports, together with one experimental in vitro study of 23 ex vivo human myocardial tissue samples. A diverse range of Gram-negative and Gram-positive pathogens was reported. Myocardial injury was identified predominantly by circulating biomarkers, with limited postmortem histopathological confirmation. No study was designed to evaluate causal or comparative pathogen-specific mechanisms. Across studies, myocardial injury occurred in heterogeneous infectious contexts without consistent association with specific bacterial species or toxins.
conclusionHuman evidence linking specific bacterial pathogens or toxins to myocardial injury in sepsis is limited and largely descriptive. Available data do not demonstrate consistent associations between specific bacterial pathogens or toxins and myocardial injury, nor do they permit mechanistic attribution. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/e3pnc/overview.
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.