ArticleCirculation reports2025
Comparative Efficacy of Noradrenaline vs. Other Vasopressors on Outcomes in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Circulation reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Pharmacological assessment of drugs retained in the 1Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Experts' recommendations for the management of adult patients with cardiogenic shock.Annals of intensive care · 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Because the optimal choice of vasopressor for the initial treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS) remains controversial, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate whether noradrenaline improves clinical outcomes compared with other vasopressors (adrenaline, dopamine, and vasopressin) in patients with CS. Methods and Results: PubMed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing noradrenaline with other vasopressors in adults with CS. A meta-analysis was conducted using fixed-effect models where appropriate. Two RCTs were included (n=337). One trial enrolled 57 patients and compared the effects of noradrenaline and adrenaline. Another study included 280 patients with CS as a subgroup and compared noradrenaline with dopamine. Pooled analysis showed that noradrenaline likely reduced the 28-day mortality rate compared with other vasopressors (very-low certainty). This corresponded to approximately 110 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (95% confidence interval: 217 fewer to 5 fewer). Secondary outcomes from the Levy study indicated fewer adverse events in the noradrenaline group. Conclusions: Noradrenaline likely reduces the 28-day mortality rate compared with other vasopressors (very-low certainty) in CS. Given the small number of studies and the potential bias, further large-scale trials are warranted.
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.