2024
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-024-07446-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Norepinephrine dose and concentration reporting: the devil is in the details

Eduardo Kattan,
Miguel Ibarra-Estrada,
Christian Jung
Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In fact, two large surveys showed that around 50% of respondents are unaware of on which formulation is NE reported locally and, therefore, administered in their practice [ 12 ], leading to potential guideline interpretation disagreements between practitioners [ 13 ]. This variability could hinder the correct application of time-sensitive clinical interventions, the comparison of results between centers, and multicentric research initiatives [ 2 , 4 , 11 , 13 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, two large surveys showed that around 50% of respondents are unaware of on which formulation is NE reported locally and, therefore, administered in their practice [ 12 ], leading to potential guideline interpretation disagreements between practitioners [ 13 ]. This variability could hinder the correct application of time-sensitive clinical interventions, the comparison of results between centers, and multicentric research initiatives [ 2 , 4 , 11 , 13 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the case of norepinephrine, it is considered an efficacy-driven agonist, meaning that the resulting signals are less attenuated in tissues with lower α 1 -adrenergic receptor density, compared to affinity-driven agonists (i.e., oxymetazoline) that will become partial agonists or even antagonists in states of lower receptor density [3]. In the article, we avoided to focus on deeper pharmacologic nuances and did not elaborate on the concept of potency; and as mentioned in a response letter [4], we preferred to simplify terms to stress the need for standardized formulation reporting on clinical grounds.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%