Can the "FloTrac" really track flow in septic patients?

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Transpulmonary thermodilution: advantages and limits.Critical care (London, England) · 2017
   Review
2. Advanced hemodynamic monitoring: principles and practice in neurocritical care.Neurocritical care · 2012
   Review
3. Use of near-infrared spectroscopy during a vascular occlusion test to assess the microcirculatory response during fluid challenge.Critical care (London, England) · 2011
   Article
4. Comparison of pulmonary artery catheter, echocardiography, and arterial waveform analysis monitoring in predicting the hemodynamic state during and after cardiac surgery.International journal of critical illness and injury science
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Arterial pressure-based cardiac output monitoring: a multicenter validation of the third-generation software in septic patients.2011

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as