Bedside echocardiography is useful in assessing children with fluid and inotrope resistant septic shock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report changes in the cardiovascular management of fluid and inotropic resistant septic shock in children based on echocardiography. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Tertiary care Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU), Chennai. PATIENTS: Twenty-two patients with unresolved septic shock after 60 ml/kg fluid plus inotropic agents in the first hour. INTERVENTIONS: Bedside echocardiography (echo) within 6 h of admission to the PICU. RESULTS: Over a 28-month period, of 37 patients with septic shock, 22 children remained in shock despite 60 ml/kg fluid and dopamine and/or dobutamine infusions as per guidelines. On clinical exam, 12 patients had warm shock and ten had cold shock, however, six exhibited an unusual pattern of cold shock with wide pulse pressures on invasive arterial monitoring. The most common echocardiographic finding was uncorrected hypovolemia in 12/22 patient while ten patients had impaired left ± right ventricular function. Echocardiography permitted an appreciation of the underlying disordered pathophysiology and a rationale for adjustment of treatment. Shock resolved in 17 (77%) and 16 patients (73%) survived to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside echo provided crucial information that was not apparent on clinical assessment and affords a simple noninvasive tool to determine the cause of low cardiac output in patients who remain in shock despite 60 ml/kg fluid and inotropic support. Most patients in our series had vasodilatory shock with wide pulse pressures and most common finding on echo was uncorrected hypovolemia. The echo findings allowed adjustment of therapy which was not possible based on clinical examination alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".