Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Thiamine as a Metabolic Resuscitator in Septic Shock: A Pilot Study

Open access
Donnino, Michael W., Andersen, Lars W., Chase, Maureen, Berg, Katherine M., Tidswell, Mark, Giberson, Tyler, Wolfe, Richard, Moskowitz, Ari, Smithline, Howard, Ngo, Long, Cocchi, Michael N.·2016·Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if intravenous thiamine would reduce lactate in patients with septic shock. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Two US hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult patients with septic shock and elevated (> 3 mmol/L) lactate between 2010 and 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Thiamine 200 mg or matching placebo twice daily for 7 days or until hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was lactate levels 24 hours after the first study dose. Of 715 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 88 patients were enrolled and received study drug. There was no difference in the primary outcome of lactate levels at 24 hours after study start between the thiamine and placebo groups (median: 2.5 mmol/L [1.5, 3.4] vs. 2.6 mmol/L [1.6, 5.1], p = 0.40). There was no difference in secondary outcomes including time to shock reversal, severity of illness and mortality. 35% of the patients were thiamine deficient at baseline. In this predefined subgroup, those in the thiamine treatment group had statistically significantly lower lactate levels at 24 hours (median 2.1 mmol/L [1.4, 2.5] vs. 3.1 [1.9, 8.3], p = 0.03). There was a statistically significant decrease in mortality over time in those receiving thiamine in this subgroup (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Administration of thiamine did not improve lactate levels or other outcomes in the overall group of patients with septic shock and elevated lactate. In those with baseline thiamine deficiency, patients in the thiamine group had significantly lower lactate levels at 24 hours and a possible decrease in mortality over time.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ccm.0000000000001572

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 293

Metadata

Authors
Donnino, M. W., Andersen, L. W., Chase, M., Berg, K. M., Tidswell, M., Giberson, T., Wolfe, R., Moskowitz, A., Smithline, H., Ngo, L., & Cocchi, M. N.
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2016-02
Volume
44
Issue
2
Pages
360-367
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2241408506
Cited by
293
References
32
FWCI
23.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Thiamine as a Metabolic Resuscitator in Septic Shock: A Pilot Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/ccm.0000000000001572
The paper
Donnino, M. W., Andersen, L. W., Chase, M., Berg, K. M., Tidswell, M., Giberson, T., Wolfe, R., Moskowitz, A., Smithline, H., Ngo, L., & Cocchi, M. N. (2016). Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Thiamine as a Metabolic Resuscitator in Septic Shock: A Pilot Study. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000001572

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.