ReviewDie Anaesthesiologie2026
[Sepsis-induced coagulopathy].
Review in Die Anaesthesiologie, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC) represents a frequent and prognostically highly relevant complication of sepsis, characterized by a dysregulated interaction between inflammation, endothelial activation and coagulation. Pathophysiologically, the excessive host immune response to pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMP) and damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMP), activation of the complement cascade, formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NET) and disruption of the endothelial glycocalyx collectively promote a prothrombotic and antifibrinolytic microenvironment, resulting in microvascular thrombosis, organ dysfunction and increased mortality. Approximately 20-25% of critically ill patients with sepsis fulfil the diagnostic criteria for SIC. Current diagnostic approaches rely on scoring systems such as the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH)-SIC, ISTH overt-disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and Japanese Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (JSTH)-DIC scores; however, their clinical utility remains limited as they predominantly collate hemorrhagic parameters even though sepsis is typically characterized by a thrombotically dominated phenotype. Viscoelastic point-of-care assays enable dynamic bedside assessment of coagulation and fibrinolysis, including the frequently occurring hypofibrinolysis or fibrinolytic shutdown, which is associated with an unfavorable outcome; however, for this specific purpose, these methods have not yet been sufficiently validated or established as a diagnostic standard. Data and recommendations on specific therapeutic options are limited. A consistent pharmacological thromboprophylaxis remains the cornerstone in patients with sepsis, with low-molecular weight heparins demonstrating advantages over unfractionated heparin regarding venous thromboembolic complications. Coagulation modulating treatment, such as antithrombin, recombinant thrombomodulin or activated protein C, have thus far failed to demonstrate consistent survival benefits in large randomized clinical trials. Experimental approaches targeting NET formation, complement activation or fibrinolytic modulation appear mechanistically promising but require further clinical validation. Overall, SIC necessitates an individualized, pathophysiology-driven diagnostic and therapeutic approach integrating inflammatory, endothelial, thrombotic and fibrinolytic alterations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42905264What 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.