FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2123406287> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2123406287 endingPage "756" @default.
• W2123406287 startingPage "746" @default.
• W2123406287 abstract "BackgroundInodilators are commonly used in critically ill patients, but their effect on survival has not been properly studied to date. The objective of this work was to conduct a network meta-analysis on the effects of inodilators on survival in adult cardiac surgery patients, and to compare and rank drugs that have not been adequately compared in head-to-head trials.MethodsRelevant studies were independently searched in BioMedCentral, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials (updated on May 1, 2014). The criteria for inclusion were: random allocation to treatment with at least one group receiving dobutamine, enoximone, levosimendan, or milrinone and at least another group receiving the above inodilators or placebo, performed in cardiac surgical patients. The endpoint was to identify differences in mortality at longest follow-up available.ResultsThe 46 included trials were published between 1995 and 2014 and randomised 2647 patients. The Bayesian network meta-analysis found that only the use of levosimendan was associated with a decrease in mortality when compared with placebo (posterior mean of OR=0.48, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.80). The posterior distribution of the probability for each inodilator to be the best and the worst drug showed that levosimendan is the best agent to improve survival after cardiac surgery. The sensitivity analyses performed did not produce different interpretative result.ConclusionLevosimendan seems to be the most efficacious inodilator to improve survival in cardiac surgery. Inodilators are commonly used in critically ill patients, but their effect on survival has not been properly studied to date. The objective of this work was to conduct a network meta-analysis on the effects of inodilators on survival in adult cardiac surgery patients, and to compare and rank drugs that have not been adequately compared in head-to-head trials. Relevant studies were independently searched in BioMedCentral, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials (updated on May 1, 2014). The criteria for inclusion were: random allocation to treatment with at least one group receiving dobutamine, enoximone, levosimendan, or milrinone and at least another group receiving the above inodilators or placebo, performed in cardiac surgical patients. The endpoint was to identify differences in mortality at longest follow-up available. The 46 included trials were published between 1995 and 2014 and randomised 2647 patients. The Bayesian network meta-analysis found that only the use of levosimendan was associated with a decrease in mortality when compared with placebo (posterior mean of OR=0.48, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.80). The posterior distribution of the probability for each inodilator to be the best and the worst drug showed that levosimendan is the best agent to improve survival after cardiac surgery. The sensitivity analyses performed did not produce different interpretative result. Levosimendan seems to be the most efficacious inodilator to improve survival in cardiac surgery." @default.
• W2123406287 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5018207523 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5027370068 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5028927302 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5048347199 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5067079106 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5068430114 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5072968608 @default.
• W2123406287 creator A5081872852 @default.
• W2123406287 date "2015-05-01" @default.
• W2123406287 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2123406287 title "A Bayesian network meta-analysis on the effect of inodilatory agents on mortality" @default.
• W2123406287 cites W1523130600 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W1840418402 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W1964644822 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W1964843986 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W1995278635 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2003135019 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2010699540 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2021656111 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2029697114 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2034011395 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2034489030 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2036788348 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2038229351 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2045264088 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2048373501 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2052715517 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2059546539 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2063412307 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2067304703 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2071297987 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2074621496 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2075257924 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2075494393 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2076807097 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2078176071 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2080049868 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2103851340 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2104481596 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2117912212 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2122079984 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2123535776 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2124783165 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2136823530 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2138441120 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2140699272 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2140740040 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2141884593 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2149818341 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2154235022 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2154923036 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2155670431 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2163868298 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2164111488 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2166051601 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2170957569 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W2321283910 @default.
• W2123406287 cites W754090597 @default.
• W2123406287 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeu446" @default.
• W2123406287 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25652947" @default.
• W2123406287 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2123406287 type Work @default.
• W2123406287 sameAs 2123406287 @default.
• W2123406287 citedByCount "57" @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872015 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872016 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872017 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872018 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872019 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872020 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872021 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872022 @default.
• W2123406287 countsByYear W21234062872023 @default.
• W2123406287 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5018207523 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5027370068 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5028927302 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5048347199 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5067079106 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5068430114 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5072968608 @default.
• W2123406287 hasAuthorship W2123406287A5081872852 @default.
• W2123406287 hasBestOaLocation W21234062871 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C177713679 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C27081682 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C2777335384 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C2778198053 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2123406287 hasConcept C95190672 @default.

• next