Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Adding levosimendan to standard care for patients with septic shock did not reduce organ dysfunction, and may have increased risk of serious adverse events.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Anthony C Gordon 1,*, Shalini Santhakumaran 2, Farah Al-Beidh 1,2, Robert M L Orme 3, Gavin D Perkins 4, Mervyn Singer 5, Daniel F McAuley 6,7, Alexina J Mason 8, Josie K Ward 1, Kieran P O’Dea 1, Timothy Felton 9, Mary Cross 2, Janis Best-Lane 1,2, Jonas Lexow 1,2, Ashley Campbell 1,2, Deborah Ashby 2

1 Section of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
2 Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
3 Department of Critical Care, Cheltenham General Hospital, Cheltenham, UK
4 Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick and Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Coventry, UK
5 Bloomsbury Institute for Intensive Care Medicine, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK
6 Centre for Experimental Medicine, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
7 Regional Intensive Care Unit, The Royal Hospitals, Belfast, UK
8 Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
9 Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
* Corresponding author Email:

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} . {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.


Responses to this report

No responses have been published.


If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions