Cargando…
The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith!
The choice of catecholamines for hemodynamic stabilisation in septic shock patients has been an ongoing debate for several years. Several studies have investigated the regional effects in septic patients. Because of an often very small sample size, because of inconsistent results and because of meth...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1550923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16563178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4859 |
_version_ | 1782129305038356480 |
---|---|
author | Meier-Hellmann, Andreas |
author_facet | Meier-Hellmann, Andreas |
author_sort | Meier-Hellmann, Andreas |
collection | PubMed |
description | The choice of catecholamines for hemodynamic stabilisation in septic shock patients has been an ongoing debate for several years. Several studies have investigated the regional effects in septic patients. Because of an often very small sample size, because of inconsistent results and because of methodical problems in the monitoring techniques used in these studies, however, it is not possible to provide clear recommendations concerning the use of catecholamines in sepsis. Prospective and adequate-sized studies are necessary because outcome data are completely lacking. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1550923 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-15509232006-08-22 The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! Meier-Hellmann, Andreas Crit Care Commentary The choice of catecholamines for hemodynamic stabilisation in septic shock patients has been an ongoing debate for several years. Several studies have investigated the regional effects in septic patients. Because of an often very small sample size, because of inconsistent results and because of methodical problems in the monitoring techniques used in these studies, however, it is not possible to provide clear recommendations concerning the use of catecholamines in sepsis. Prospective and adequate-sized studies are necessary because outcome data are completely lacking. BioMed Central 2006 2006-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC1550923/ /pubmed/16563178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4859 Text en Copyright © 2006 BioMed Central Ltd |
spellingShingle | Commentary Meier-Hellmann, Andreas The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
title | The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
title_full | The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
title_fullStr | The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
title_full_unstemmed | The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
title_short | The choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
title_sort | choice of catecholamines in septic shock: more and more good arguments to strengthen the known position, but don't lose the faith! |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1550923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16563178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4859 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT meierhellmannandreas thechoiceofcatecholaminesinsepticshockmoreandmoregoodargumentstostrengthentheknownpositionbutdontlosethefaith AT meierhellmannandreas choiceofcatecholaminesinsepticshockmoreandmoregoodargumentstostrengthentheknownpositionbutdontlosethefaith |