SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000
Hypertonic versus isotonic crystalloid for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- A review of emergency equipment carried and procedures performed by UK front line paramedics on paediatric patients.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypertonic solutions are considered to have a greater ability to expand blood volume and thus elevate blood pressure and can be administered as a small volume infusion over a short time period. On the other hand, the use of hypertonic solutions for volume replacement may also have important disadvantages.
objectivesTo determine whether hypertonic crystalloid decreases mortality in patients with hypovolaemia with and without head injuries. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and the Specialised register of the Injuries Group. We checked reference lists of all articles identified and searched the National Research Register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing hypertonic to isotonic crystalloid in patients with trauma, burns or undergoing surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. MAIN
resultsSixteen trials were identified with a total of 837 participants. Data on death were obtained in twelve of the studies. Only one trial reported data on disability. The pooled RR for death in trauma patients was 0.84 (95% CI 0.61-1.16), and in patients with burns 1.49 (95% CI 0.56-3.95), and in patients undergoing surgery 0.62 (95% cI 0.08-4.57). In the one trial that gave data on disability using the Glasgow Outcome Scale the relative risk was 0.99 (95% CI 0.06-15.93). REVIEWER'S
conclusionsThis review does not give us enough data to be able to say whether hypertonic crystalloid is better than isotonic crystalloid for the resuscitation of patients with trauma, burns, or those undergoing surgery. However, the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences. Further trials are needed comparing hypertonic to isotonic crystalloid. Trials need to be large enough to detect a clinically important difference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.