MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402650868 · doi:10.1007/s00134-024-07587-1

Landiolol for heart rate control in patients with septic shock and persistent tachycardia. A multicenter randomized clinical trial (Landi-SEP)

2024· article· en· W4402650868 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Rehberg, Sandra Frank, Vladimír Černý, Radek Cihlář, Rainer Borgstedt, Gíanni Biancofiore, Fabio Guarracino, Andreas Schober, Helmut Trimmel, Thomas Pernerstorfer, Christian Siebers, P Dostál, Andrea Morelli, Michael Joannidis, Ingrid Pretsch, Christian Fuchs, Tim Rahmel, Matej Podbregar, Éva Duliczki, Kadri Tamme, Martin Unger, Jan Sus, Christoph Klade, Kurt Krejcy, Nairi Kirchbaumer-Baroian, Günther Krumpl, František Duška

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersAOP OrphanUniversität Bielefeld
KeywordsMedicineSeptic shockAnesthesiologyRandomized controlled trialTachycardiaPain medicineShock (circulatory)AnesthesiaHeart rateMulticenter trialMulticenter studyInternal medicineEmergency medicineCardiologyIntensive care medicineSepsisBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Excessive tachycardia in resuscitated septic shock patients can impair hemodynamics and worsen patient outcome. We investigated whether heart rate (HR) control can be achieved without increased vasopressor requirements using the titratable highly selective, ultra-short-acting β1-blocker landiolol. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, controlled trial was conducted at 20 sites in 7 European countries from 2018 to 2022 and investigated the efficacy and safety of landiolol in adult patients with septic shock and persistent tachycardia. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either landiolol along with standard treatment (n = 99) or standard treatment alone (n = 101). The combined primary endpoint was HR response (i.e., HR within the range of 80-94 beats per minute) and its maintenance without increasing vasopressor requirements during the first 24 h after treatment start. Key secondary endpoints were 28-day mortality and adverse events. RESULTS: Out of 196 included septic shock patients, 98 received standard treatment combined with landiolol and 98 standard treatment alone. A significantly larger proportion of patients met the combined primary endpoint in the landiolol group than in the control group (39.8% [39/98] vs. 23.5% [23/98]), with a between-group difference of 16.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.4-28.8%; p = 0.013). There were no statistically significant differences between study groups in tested secondary outcomes and adverse events. CONCLUSION: The ultra-short-acting beta-blocker landiolol was effective in reducing and maintaining HR without increasing vasopressor requirements after 24 h in patients with septic shock and persistent tachycardia. There were no differences in adverse events and clinical outcomes such as 28-day mortality vs. standard of care. The results of this study, in the context of previous trials, do not support a treatment strategy of stringent HR reduction (< 95 bpm) in an unselected septic shock population with persistent tachycardia. Further investigations are needed to identify septic shock patient phenotypes that benefit clinically from HR control.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care MedicineSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207