ArticleAcute and critical care2026
Managing sepsis in the era of precision medicine: a narrative review.
Article in Acute and critical care, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For decades, the management of sepsis has adopted protocolized care bundles. However, the plateau in global survival rates suggests that the "one-size-fits-all" paradigm exemplified by early goal-directed therapy has reached its limits. The physiological and biological heterogeneity of sepsis necessitates a fundamental shift toward precision medicine. This review examines the transition from empirical resuscitation to individualized care across four critical domains. First, fluid strategy is evolving from aggressive loading to dynamic stewardship. Current evidence favors balanced crystalloids over saline and advocates restrictive dosing guided by dynamic responsiveness indices and venous congestion assessments to prevent iatrogenic harm. Second, hemodynamic support is shifting toward a catecholamine‑sparing strategy. To mitigate the metabolic and immunologic toxicities of high-dose norepinephrine, multimodal vasopressors, such as vasopressin and angiotensin II, are used to target specific biological phenotypes, such as high-renin states. Third, antibiotic management balances rapid administration with rigorous stewardship through pharmacokinetic optimization, including continuous infusions, diagnostic pauses for stable patients, and short-course regimens. Finally, corticosteroid therapy is moving beyond universal debate toward targeted application. Emerging data support their use in specific responder phenotypes, notably severe community-acquired pneumonia and distinct transcriptomic endotypes. In conclusion, modern critical care is moving beyond rigid protocols toward a personalized framework. By integrating bedside biomarkers and clinical phenotypes, clinicians can deliver "the right drug, at the right dose, for the right patient," thereby optimizing outcomes in sepsis and septic shock.
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.