Efficacy and safety of methylene blue in patients with vasodilatory shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Frontiers in Medicine, ISSN: 2296-858X, Vol: 9, Page: 950596
2022
- 23Citations
- 51Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations23
- Citation Indexes23
- 23
- CrossRef6
- Captures51
- Readers51
- 51
Review Description
Background: The role of methylene blue (MB) in patients with vasodilatory shock is unclear. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MB in patients with vasodilatory shock. Methods: We searched MEDLINE at PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CNKI, CBM and Wanfang Medical databases for all observational and intervention studies comparing the effect of MB vs. control in vasodilatory shock patients. This study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. There were no language restrictions for inclusion. Results: A total of 15 studies with 832 patients were included. Pooled data demonstrated that administration of MB along with vasopressors significantly reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.85, P = 0.008; I = 7%]. This benefit in mortality rate was also seen in a subgroup analysis including randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials. In addition, the vasopressor requirement was reduced in the MB group [mean difference (MD) −0.77, 95%CI −1.26 to −0.28, P = 0.002; I = 80%]. Regarding hemodynamics, MB increased the mean arterial pressure, heart rate and peripheral vascular resistance. In respect to organ function, MB was associated with a lower incidence of renal failure, while in regards to oxygen metabolism, it was linked to reduced lactate levels. MB had no effect on the other outcomes and no serious side effects. Conclusions: Concomitant administration of MB and vasopressors improved hemodynamics, decreased vasopressor requirements, reduced lactate levels, and improved survival in patients with vasodilatory shock. However, further studies are required to confirm these findings. Systematic review registration: Identifier: CRD42021281847.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85139464668&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.950596; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36237547; https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2022.950596/full; https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.950596; https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2022.950596/full
Frontiers Media SA
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know