Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 284

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pathophysiology, echocardiographic evaluation, biomarker findings, and prognostic implications of septic cardiomyopathy: a review of the literature

Open access
Ehrman, Robert R., Sullivan, Ashley N., Favot, Mark J., Sherwin, Robert L., Reynolds, Christian A., Abidov, Aiden, Levy, Phillip D.·2018·Critical Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a common condition encountered by emergency and critical care physicians, with significant costs, both economic and human. Myocardial dysfunction in sepsis is a well-recognized but poorly understood phenomenon. There is an extensive body of literature on this subject, yet results are conflicting and no objective definition of septic cardiomyopathy exists, representing a critical knowledge gap. OBJECTIVES: In this article, we review the pathophysiology of septic cardiomyopathy, covering the effects of key inflammatory mediators on both the heart and the peripheral vasculature, highlighting the interconnectedness of these two systems. We focus on the extant literature on echocardiographic and laboratory assessment of the heart in sepsis, highlighting gaps therein and suggesting avenues for future research. Implications for treatment are briefly discussed. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of conflicting data, echocardiographic measures of left ventricular (systolic or diastolic) or right ventricular function cannot currently provide reliable prognostic information in patients with sepsis. Natriuretic peptides and cardiac troponins are of similarly unclear utility. Heterogeneous classification of illness, treatment variability, and lack of formal diagnostic criteria for septic cardiomyopathy contribute to the conflicting results. Development of formal diagnostic criteria, and use thereof in future studies, may help elucidate the link between cardiac performance and outcomes in patients with sepsis.

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 · 10.1186/s13054-018-2043-8

Cites

70 of 70 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 70 references

Metadata

Authors
Ehrman, R. R., Sullivan, A. N., Favot, M. J., Sherwin, R. L., Reynolds, C. A., Abidov, A., & Levy, P. D.
Venue
Critical Care
Published
2018-05-04
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
112-112
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2805299785
Cited by
284
References
70
FWCI
13.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Pathophysiology, echocardiographic evaluation, biomarker findings, and prognostic implications of septic cardiomyopathy: a review of the literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13054-018-2043-8
The paper
Ehrman, R. R., Sullivan, A. N., Favot, M. J., Sherwin, R. L., Reynolds, C. A., Abidov, A., & Levy, P. D. (2018). Pathophysiology, echocardiographic evaluation, biomarker findings, and prognostic implications of septic cardiomyopathy: a review of the literature. Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-018-2043-8

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.