scholarly journals The Effect of Early Vasopressin Use on Patients With Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haijun Huang ◽  
Chenxia Wu ◽  
Qinkang Shen ◽  
Hua Xu ◽  
Yixin Fang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Vasopressin Infusion ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Short Term Mortality ◽  
Length Of Hospitalization ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background: The effect of early vasopressin initiation on clinical outcomes in patients with septic shock is uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of early start of vasopressin support within 6 hours after the diagnosis on clinical outcomes in septic shock patients.Methods: We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies from inception to the 1st of October 2020. We included studies involving adult patients (> 16 years)with septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality and in the experimental group patients in the studies receiving vasopressin infusion within 6 hours after diagnosis of septic shock and in the control group patients in the studies receiving no vasopressin infusion or vasopressin infusion 6 hours after diagnosis of septic shock, clearly comparing with clinically relevant secondary outcomes(use of renal replacement therapy(RRT),new onset arrhythmias, ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: Five studies including 788 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that short-term mortality between the two groups was no difference (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.48; P =0.6; χ2 =0.83; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes demonstrated that the use of RRT was less in the experimental group than that of the control group (OR =0.63; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.88; P =0.007; χ2 =3.15; I2 =36%).The new onset arrhythmias between the two groups was no statistically significant difference (OR =0.59; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.1; P =0.10; χ2 =4.7; I2 =36%). There was no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay(mean difference = 0.16; 95% CI, - 0.91 to 1.22; P = 0.77; χ2 = 6.08; I2 =34%) and length of hospitalization (mean difference = -2.41; 95% CI, -6.61 to 1.78; P = 0.26; χ2 = 8.57; I2 =53%) between the two groups.Conclusions: Early initiation of vasopressin in patients within 6 hours of septic shock onset was not associated with decreased short-term mortality, new onset arrhythmias, shorter ICU length of stay and length of hospitalization, but can reduce the use of RRT. Further large-scale RCTs are still needed to evaluate the benefit of starting vasopressin in the early phase of septic shock.

Thrombocytopenia in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuting Li ◽  
Hongxiang Li ◽  
Jianxing Guo ◽  
Dong Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Short Term Mortality

Abstract Background Thrombocytopenia is a common feature of sepsis or septic shock, but few meta-analyses have specifically evaluated prognostic importance of thrombocytopenia in patients with sepsis or septic shock. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the prognosis of thrombocytopenia in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock.Methods We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for studies from inception to the 30th of November 2019. Prospective or retrospective cohort studies comparing thrombocytopenia to no thrombocytopenia in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock were included. All authors reported our primary outcome of short-term mortality(defined as ICU or 48-hour mortality) with clinically relevant secondary outcomes(ICU length of stay, rate of AKI, rate of mechanical ventilation). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI).Results Seven studies including 4243 patients were included. The results of this meta-analysis showed that the short-term mortality of thrombocytopenia group was higher than that of the no thrombocytopenia group (odds ratio [OR]=2.01;95% CI, 1.73-2.33; P<0.00001; I2=78%).In addition, compared with no thrombocytopenia group, thrombocytopenia group showed higher rate of AKI(odds ratio [OR]=1.31;95% CI, 1.03-1.66; P=0.03 I2=65%) and longer ICU length of stay(Mean difference=1.31;95% CI, 0.66-1.96; P<0.0001; I2=50%). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of mechanical ventilation between 2 groups (odds ratio [OR]=1.24;95% CI, 0.82-1.88; P=0.30; I2=0%).Conclusions Thrombocytopenia was associated with increased short-term mortality, ICU length of stay and rate of AKI in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock. The analysis of secondary outcomes showed no significant difference in the rate of mechanical ventilation between the two groups. Further randomized controlled studies of thrombocytopenia are still required.

scholarly journals Comparison of culture-negative and culture-positive sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuting Li ◽  
Jianxing Guo ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Hongxiang Li ◽  
Yangyang Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Duration ◽  
Culture Positive ◽  
Culture Negative

Abstract Background Mortality and other clinical outcomes between culture-negative and culture-positive septic patients have been documented inconsistently and are very controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical outcomes of culture-negative and culture-positive sepsis or septic shock. Methods We searched the PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases for studies from inception to the 1st of January 2021. We included studies involving patients with sepsis or septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of all-cause mortality and clearly compared culture-negative versus culture-positive patients with clinically relevant secondary outcomes (ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, mechanical ventilation requirements, mechanical ventilation duration and renal replacement requirements). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Seven studies including 22,655 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the all-cause mortality between two groups (OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.01; P = 0.12; Chi-2 = 30.71; I2 = 80%). Secondary outcomes demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay (MD = − 0.19;95% CI, − 0.42 to 0.04; P = 0.10;Chi-2 = 5.73; I2 = 48%), mechanical ventilation requirements (OR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.11; P = 0.61; Chi2 = 6.32; I2 = 53%) and renal replacement requirements (OR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.01; P = 0.06; Chi-2 = 1.21; I2 = 0%) between two groups. The hospital length of stay of culture-positive group was longer than that of the culture-negative group (MD = − 3.48;95% CI, − 4.34 to − 2.63; P < 0.00001;Chi-2 = 1.03; I2 = 0%). The mechanical ventilation duration of culture-positive group was longer than that of the culture-negative group (MD = − 0.64;95% CI, − 0.88 to − 0.4; P < 0.00001;Chi-2 = 4.86; I2 = 38%). Conclusions Culture positivity or negativity was not associated with mortality of sepsis or septic shock patients. Furthermore, culture-positive septic patients had similar ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilation requirements and renal replacement requirements as those culture-negative patients. The hospital length of stay and mechanical ventilation duration of culture-positive septic patients were both longer than that of the culture-negative patients. Further large-scale studies are still required to confirm these results.

scholarly journals Association Between Prior Calcium Channel Blocker Use and Mortality in Septic Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xianfei Ding ◽  
Yuqing Cui ◽  
Huoyan Liang ◽  
Dong Wang ◽  
Lifeng Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Calcium Channel ◽  
Calcium Channel Blocker ◽  
Channel Blocker ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Short Term Mortality

Background: The aim of this study was to comprehensively review the literature and synthesize the evidence concerning the relationship between prior calcium channel blocker (CCB) use and mortality in patients with sepsis.Methods: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases were searched from their inception to April 9, 2020. Cohort studies related to prior calcium channel blocker use in patients with sepsis were analyzed. Pairs of reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome of 90-days mortality or secondary outcome of short-term mortality, including 30-days, Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and in-hospital mortality, were analyzed. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I2 statistic and was considered moderate if I2 was 50–75% and high if I2 was ≥75%. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality of the studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the results.Results: In total, 639 potentially relevant studies were identified, and the full texts of 25 articles were reviewed. Ultimately, five cohort studies involving 280,982 patients were confirmed to have a low risk of bias and were included. Prior CCB use was associated with a significantly lower 90-days mortality in sepsis patients [OR, 0.90 (0.85–0.95); I2 = 31.9%]. Moreover, prior CCB use was associated with a significantly reduced short-term mortality rate in septic shock patients [OR, 0.61 (0.38–0.97); I2 = 62.4%] but not in sepsis patients [OR, 0.83 (0.66–1.04); I2 = 95.4%].Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that prior CCB use is significantly associated with improved 90-days mortality in sepsis patients and short-term mortality in septic shock patients. This study provides preliminary evidence of an association between prior CCB use and mortality in sepsis patients.

scholarly journals Comparison of Culture-Negative and Culture-Positive Sepsis or Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuting Li ◽  
Jianxing Guo ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Hongxiang Li ◽  
Yangyang Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Duration ◽  
Culture Positive ◽  
Culture Negative

Abstract Background: Mortality and other clinical outcomes between culture-negative and culture-positive septic patients have been documented inconsistently and are very controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical outcomes of culture-negative and culture-positive sepsis or septic shock.Methods: We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for studies from inception to the 1st of January 2021. We included studies involving patients with sepsis or septic shock. All authors reported our primary outcome of all-cause mortality and clearly comparing culture-negative versus culture-positive patients with clinically relevant secondary outcomes (ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, mechanical ventilation requirements, mechanical ventilation duration and renal replacement requirements). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: Seven studies including 22655 patients were included. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the all-cause mortality between two groups (OR=0.95; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.01; P=0.12; Chi2=30.71; I2=80%) . Secondary outcomes demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference in the ICU length of stay(MD=-0.19;95% CI, -0.42 to 0.04; P=0.10;Chi2=5.73; I2=48%), mechanical ventilation requirements(OR=1.05; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.18; P=0.41; Chi2=5.89; I2=66%) and renal replacement requirements(OR=0.82; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.01; P=0.06; Chi2=1.21; I2=0%) between two groups. The hospital length of stay of culture-positive group was longer than that of the culture-negative group(MD=-3.48;95% CI, -4.34 to -2.63; P<0.00001;Chi2=1.03; I2=0%). The mechanical ventilation duration of culture-positive group was longer than that of the culture-negative group(MD=-0.64;95% CI, -0.88 to -0.4; P<0.00001;Chi2=4.86; I2=38%).Conclusions: Culture positivity or negativity was not associated with mortality of sepsis or septic shock patients. Furthermore, culture-positive septic patients had similar ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilation requirements and renal replacement requirements as those culture-negative patients. The hospital length of stay and mechanical ventilation duration of culture-positive septic patients were both longer than that of the culture-negative patients. Further large-scale studies are still required to confirm these results.

scholarly journals qSOFA is a Poor Predictor of Short-Term Mortality in All Patients: A Systematic Review of 410,000 Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronson S. L. Lo ◽  
Ling Yan Leung ◽  
Mikkel Brabrand ◽  
Chun Yu Yeung ◽  
Suet Yi Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Short Term Mortality

Background: To determine the validity of the Quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in the prediction of outcome (in-hospital and 1-month mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and hospital and ICU length of stay) in adult patients with or without suspected infections where qSOFA was calculated and reported; Methods: Cochrane Central of Controlled trials, EMBASE, BIOSIS, OVID MEDLINE, OVID Nursing Database, and the Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database were the main databases searched. All studies published until 12 April 2018 were considered. All studies except case series, case reports, and conference abstracts were considered. Studies that included patients with neutropenic fever exclusively were excluded. Results: The median AUROC for in-hospital mortality (27 studies with 380,920 patients) was 0.68 (a range of 0.55 to 0.82). A meta-analysis of 377,623 subjects showed a polled AUROC of 0.68 (0.65 to 0.71); however, it also confirmed high heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 98.8%, 95%CI 98.6 to 99.0). The median sensitivity and specificity for in-hospital mortality (24 studies with 118,051 patients) was 0.52 (range 0.16 to 0.98) and 0.81 (0.19 to 0.97), respectively. Median positive and negative predictive values were 0.2 (range 0.07 to 0.38) and 0.94 (0.85 to 0.99), respectively.

scholarly journals Prognostic value of new-onset right bundle-branch block in acute myocardial infarction patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e4497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juntao Wang ◽  
Hongxing Luo ◽  
Chunling Kong ◽  
Shujuan Dong ◽  
Jingchao Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Short Term Mortality ◽  
Long Term Mortality ◽  
New Onset

Background Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and bundle-branch block have poor prognoses. The new European Society of Cardiology guideline suggests a primary percutaneous coronary intervention strategy when persistent ischemic symptoms occur in patients with persistent ischemic symptoms and right bundle-branch block (RBBB), but the level of evidence is not high. In fact, the presence of RBBB may lead to the misdiagnosis of transmural ischemia and mask the early diagnosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Moreover, new-onset RBBB is occasionally caused by AMI. Our study aims to investigate the prognostic value of new-onset RBBB in AMI. Methods and Results We conducted a meta-analysis of studies to evaluate the prognostic value of RBBB in AMI patients. Of 914 primary records, five studies and 874 MI patients were included for meta-analysis. Compared with previous RBBB, AMI patients with new-onset RBBB had a higher risk of long-term mortality (RR, 1.66, 95% CI [1.31–2.09], I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.000, n = 2), ventricular arrhythmia (RR, 4.86, 95% CI [2.10–11.27], I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.000, n = 3), and cardiogenic shock (RR, 2.76, 95% CI [1.66–4.59], I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.000, n = 3), but a lower risk of heart failure (RR, 0.66, 95% CI [0.52–0.85], I2 = 2.50%, p = 0.001, n = 4). Compared with AMI patients with new-onset permanent RBBB, patients with new-onset transient RBBB had a lower risk of short-term mortality (RR, 0.20, 95% CI [0.11–0.37], I2 = 44.1%, p = 0.000, n = 4). Conclusion New-onset RBBB is likely to increase long-term mortality, ventricular arrhythmia, and cardiogenic shock, but not heart failure in AMI patients. AMI patients with new-onset transient RBBB have a lower risk of short-term mortality than those with new-onset permanent RBBB. Revascularization therapies should be considered when persistent ischemic symptoms occur in patients with RBBB, especially new-onset RBBB.

scholarly journals Effect of vitamin C in critically ill patients with sepsis and septic shock: A meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 104 (1) ◽  
pp. 003685042199817
Author(s):  
Fang Feng ◽  
Huyong Yang ◽  
Weiwei Yang ◽  
Min Li ◽  
Xueni Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Vitamin C ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of vitamin C in patients experiencing sepsis and septic shock. The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about vitamin C treatments for critically ill patients suffering from sepsis and septic shock from inception until December 31, 2019. The primary outcome was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were the ICU length of stay and the dose of vasopressors. A meta-analysis of nine RCTs with a total of 584 patients (301 in the intervention group and 283 in the control group) was conducted. There were significant differences between the vitamin C group and the control group in 28-day mortality (fixed effects OR = 0.60 95% CI [0.42, 0.85], p = 0.004) and in the dose of vasopressors (SMD = −0.88 95% CI [−1.48, −0.29], p = 0.003); however, the ICU length of stay was the same between the two groups (SMD  = −0.33 95% CI [−0.87, 0.20] p = 0.23). This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of vitamin C (compared with placebo) led to a reduction in ICU mortality and a reduction in the dose of vasopressors in patients with septic shock. However, the ICU length of stay was not significantly different between the two groups. Therefore, multicentre and high-quality RCTs are needed to further clarify the safety and effectiveness of vitamin C among patients with sepsis and septic shock.

scholarly journals Efficacy of milrinone and dobutamine in low cardiac output states: Systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. E26-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Mathew ◽  
Sarah M. Visintini ◽  
F. Daniel Ramirez ◽  
Pietro DiSanto ◽  
Trevor Simard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Low Cardiac Output ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Eligibility Requirements

Purpose: Patients in cardiac intensive care units (ICU) are admitted with increasingly higher disease acuity and a larger burden of non-cardiac critical illness. Accordingly, positive inotropes are being used with increased frequency and little comparative data to support drug selection. We compared the effectiveness and safety of dobutamine and milrinone in low cardiac output states (LCOS) and/or cardiogenic shock (CS). Methods: We performed a systematic review comparing dobutamine to milrinone on all-cause mortality, length of stay in the ICU (LOS-ICU), length of stay in hospital (LOS-H) and significant arrhythmias in hospitalized patients with LCOS and/or CS. Results: We identified 11 studies that meet eligibility requirements and which were published between 2001 and 2016 and included 23,056 patients. Only one randomized clinical trial was identified, with the remaining studies comprising observational cohort studies. The primary outcome, all-cause mortality, trended towards a benefit with milrinone but did not meet pre-specified significance (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.00-1.29, p=0.06). While LOS-ICU (mean difference -0.72, 95% CI -1.10- -0.34, p=0.0002) was shorter with dobutamine, there was no difference in LOS-H (mean difference -1.22, 95% CI -4.68 – 2.24, p=0.49). Significant arrhythmias, specifically symptomatic and/or requiring antiarrhythmic therapy, were no different between the groups (OR 1.78, 95% CI 0.85-3.76, p=0.13). Conclusions: Currently available data comparing milrinone to dobutamine in patients requiring inotropic support is limited. Dobutamine may be associated with a shorter LOS in the ICU, with a worrisome signal of increased risk of allcause mortality. Randomized data are needed to guide inotrope selection in patients with LCOS and/or CS.

scholarly journals Steroid, ascorbic acid, and thiamine in adults with sepsis and septic shock: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ka Man Fong ◽  
Shek Yin Au ◽  
George Wing Yiu Ng
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Ascorbic Acid ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Short Term Mortality ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

AbstractTo assess the effect from individual component in combinations of steroid, ascorbic acid, and thiamine on outcomes in adults with sepsis and septic shock with component network meta-analysis (NMA). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1980 to March 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that studied the use of glucocorticoid, fludrocortisone, ascorbic acid, and thiamine in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Citations screening, study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were independently performed by two authors. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. Secondary outcomes were longer-term mortality, time to resolution of shock and duration of mechanical ventilation. Thirty-three RCTs including 9898 patients presented on short-term mortality. In additive component NMA, patients on ascorbic acid alone (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.57–0.97) or the combination of glucocorticoid and fludrocortisone (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80–0.99) had lower short-term mortality, but only the latter was associated with improved long-term mortality (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82–0.98). The use of glucocorticoid or the combination of glucocorticoid, ascorbic acid and thiamine hastened resolution of shock. Component NMA showed glucocorticoid (MD − 0.96, 95% CI − 1.61 to − 0.30) but not ascorbic acid or thiamine shortened the time to resolution of shock. Glucocorticoid shortened the duration of mechanical ventilation (MD − 1.48, 95% CI − 2.43 to − 0.52). In adults with sepsis and septic shock, the combination of glucocorticoid and fludrocortisone improved short-term and longer-term mortality. Glucocorticoid shortened the time to resolution of shock and duration of mechanical ventilation. There was no strong evidence supporting the routine use of thiamine and ascorbic acid, but they were associated with minimal adverse effects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document