ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Comparison of short-term and long-term renal function effects of vasopressin and norepinephrine in patients with septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical value of probiotics as adjunctive therapy for diabetic nephropathy: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Early identification of acute kidney injury progression in critically ill patients with sepsis: interpretable machine learning approach.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vasopressin and its derivatives, as second-line vasoactive agents, are increasingly being applied in the treatment of septic shock, but their effects on major organs, particularly the renal system, remain inadequately evaluated. Methods: A systematic search was conducted based on 4 online databases Embase, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus, for studies published up to April 2025 that compared the renal function outcomes between vasopressin versus norepinephrine. All the studies enrolled adult patients with septic shock. Both short-term outcomes (urine output, serum creatinine levels) and long-term outcomes (acute kidney injury (AKI) rate, renal failure (RF), days free of RF, and renal replacement therapy (RRT)-use rate) were assessed. Results: A total of 13 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 10 RCTs and 3 retrospective cohort studies, with a total of 2,024 septic shock patients (aged 46.76-68 years) engaged. Meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the vasopressin and norepinephrine groups in the incidence of AKI (Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.07, 95% CI [0.86, 1.33], P = 0.53), days free of RF (MD = 1.52, 95% CI [-2.21, 5.25], P = 0.43), incidence of RF (RR = 1.01, 95% CI [0.85, 1.19], P = 0.94), or urine output (MD = -161.93 mL, 95% CI [-690.31, 366.45], P = 0.55). However, vasopressin was associated with a significantly lower serum creatinine level (MD = -0.15 mg/dL, 95% CI [-0.29, -0.02], P = 0.028) and a reduced RRT utilization rate (RR = 0.76, 95% CI [0.62, 0.93], P < 0.01) compared to norepinephrine. Conclusion: Vasopressin demonstrates potential renal protective effects in the management of septic shock, as evidenced by a significant reduction in serum creatinine levels and a decreased need for renal replacement therapy compared with norepinephrine. However, the evidence supporting its benefit in reducing the incidence of AKI and RF, or prolonging the days free of RF remains of low quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.