An abstract can give a different account of treatment from the case narrative. That matters when the report is cited as evidence that a specific drug was used during a poisoning episode.
Herath and colleagues described drowsiness, a heart rate of 55 beats per minute and blood pressure of 80/60 mmHg after reported amitraz ingestion. The abstract named dobutamine as part of the response to low blood pressure. The detailed case narrative instead named dopamine, described its administration over four hours, and the discussion again referred to dopamine. The two names describe different drugs.
Attribute each statement to the section that contains it. If the actual agent matters to an opinion, the medication administration record or infusion documentation would provide direct evidence about what was given. This published case documents a clinical course with hypotension and bradycardia, while its internal discrepancy leaves uncertainty about the drug used to support blood pressure.
Herath et al., BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology (2017), full text ยท DOI