SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Vasopressors”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Closed-loop vasopressor systems for hemodynamic control in perioperative and critical care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maintaining mean arterial pressure (MAP) within a predefined target is central to haemodynamic management in surgical and critically ill adults receiving vasopressors. Closed-loop vasopressor (CLV) systems automate titration to optimise blood pressure control, but their clinical effectiveness remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing CLV with manual titration. This PRISMA 2020-compliant review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420250655697). MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Library were searched (January 2000-June 2025). Randomised controlled trials enrolling adults receiving vasopressors in perioperative or intensive care settings were included. Primary outcomes were time within the MAP target range and time spent in hypotension or hypertension. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and certainty of evidence using GRADE. Random- or fixed-effects models were selected according to heterogeneity. Six randomized controlled trials (215 patients) were included in the systematic review, whereas five perioperative trials contributed to the meta-analysis of haemodynamic control outcomes, and one ICU-based study was summarized narratively because it did not report comparable MAP control endpoints. CLV increased time within the MAP target range (mean difference [MD] 33.94%, 95% CI 20.41-47.46; I2 = 77%) and reduced time in hypotension (MD - 18.24%, 95% CI - 28.95 to - 7.53; I2 = 73%). There was no significant difference in time in hypertension, cumulative norepinephrine dose, or major/minor adverse events. ICU length of stay was not pooled because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Certainty of evidence ranged from low to high (moderate for haemodynamic control outcomes). CLV systems improved haemodynamic control, primarily in perioperative settings, but heterogeneity and small samples limit confidence in effect size and generalisability. Evidence in critically ill populations remains limited, and larger trials are needed to determine whether improvements in these physiological surrogate endpoints translate into meaningful patient-centred outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety and outcomes of dapagliflozin initiation in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: A post-hoc analysis of the defender trial.

BACKGROUND: SGLT2 inhibitor use in acute kidney injury (AKI) is controversial due to concerns about hemodynamic instability. We evaluated dapagliflozin initiation in critically ill patients with AKI enrolled in the DEFENDER trial. METHODS: Among 212 patients with AKI at enrollment (100 dapagliflozin, 112 control), we compared 28-day mortality, kidney replacement therapy (KRT), and composite death/KRT. Adjusted risk differences were estimated controlling for age, sepsis, baseline vasopressor use, and creatinine. Physiological trajectories (creatinine, urine output, fluid balance, acid-base parameters) over days 1-5 were analyzed using mixed models. Likelihood ratios quantified compatibility with clinically meaningful harm or benefit. RESULTS: Event rates were similar: 28-day mortality 38% vs 40%, KRT 12% vs 18%, composite 41% vs 42% (dapagliflozin vs control). Adjusted risk differences were - 1.9% (95% CI -14.5 to 10.7) for death, -7.4% (-16.2 to 1.5) for KRT, and - 0.9% (-13.6 to 11.8) for the composite. Physiological trajectories showed no divergence suggestive of hemodynamic or metabolic instability. Likelihood ratios provided limited separation: at 5% absolute effect threshold, LR against harm was 1.47 and against benefit 1.19. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin initiation in critically ill patients with AKI was not associated with excess mortality, KRT, or physiological derangement. The near-neutral evidential profile indicates neither moderate harm nor benefit can be excluded, supporting feasibility of dedicated trials of SGLT2 inhibitors in AKI.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Empirical Meropenem Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Critically Ill Adults With Sepsis: Feasibility of a Randomised Trial.

BACKGROUND: Meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam are commonly used empirical antibiotics in critically ill adults with sepsis, but whether one is superior to the other is uncertain. METHODS: The Empirical Meropenem versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Adult Patients with Sepsis (EMPRESS) trial is an ongoing investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, adaptive clinical trial with an integrated feasibility phase comparing empirical treatment with meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill adults with sepsis. The integrated feasibility phase enrolled 200 participants across 10 intensive care units (ICUs) in Denmark between 28 June and 12 December 2025. Five pre-specified feasibility criteria were evaluated; if all feasibility criteria were met, the trial would proceed unaltered, whereas failure to meet one or more criteria would require intervention and re-evaluation. RESULTS: We randomised 200 of 284 screened patients (70.4%). The median age was 70 years (interquartile range (IQR): 60-77), 65.5% were males. At randomisation, 80.0% received vasopressors or inotropes, and 43.5% were on invasive mechanical ventilation. Four of five pre-specified feasibility criteria were met: time to completion of the feasibility phase (5.5 months vs. threshold < 12.0 months), recruitment proportion (70.4% vs. threshold ≥ 50.0%), proportion of participants without consent to the continued collection of data (2.5% vs. threshold < 5.0%) and protocol adherence (81.0% vs. threshold ≥ 75.0%). The proportion of participants with timely primary outcome data availability (30-day mortality) within 45 days was 85.5% and below the pre-specified threshold of ≥ 95.0%. The proportions were low in the first 3 months (33.3%, 22.2% and 30.8%, respectively), increasing to 95.8% in the last month of the feasibility phase. All-cause mortality at 30 days was 30.5%, and specific serious adverse reactions occurred in 4.0% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: In this integrated feasibility evaluation of the EMPRESS trial comparing empirical meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill adults with sepsis, four of five pre-specified feasibility criteria were met. The unmet criterion, timely primary outcome data availability, improved substantially during the feasibility phase. We consider the trial feasible and will proceed without modifications. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This feasibility study assessed recruitment, randomised allocation and data collection for the multicentre EMPRESS trial. For adaptive trials on trial platforms, careful interim checking of trial design functions is an important and necessary process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Information System EUCT number: 2023-509703-33-00; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06184659; Universal Trial Number: U1111-1301-6379.

Humans↗