ReviewCritical care (London, England)2012
A critique of fluid bolus resuscitation in severe sepsis.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03137446 (Assessing Targeted Fluid Resuscitation Strategies Among Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Assessing Targeted Fluid Resuscitation Strategies Among Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physiological changes after fluid bolus therapy in sepsis: a systematic review of contemporary data.Critical care (London, England) · 2014Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Electrocardiometry for the Management of Pediatric Septic Shock: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Critical care explorations · 2025Trial
- Restricted fluid bolus volume in early septic shock: results of the Fluids in Shock pilot trial.Archives of disease in childhood · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Comparative Evaluation of Crystalloid Resuscitation Rate in a Human Model of Compensated Haemorrhagic Shock.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2016Trial
- The Safety of a Conservative Fluid Replacement Strategy in Adults Hospitalised with Malaria.PloS one · 2015Trial
- Exploring mechanisms of excess mortality with early fluid resuscitation: insights from the FEAST trial.BMC medicine · 2013Trial
- Clinical criteria for the definition of refractory septic shock: a joint Delphi consensus from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM).Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of Negative Fluid Balance on Mortality and Outcome of Patients with Confirmed COVID-19.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2023Article
- Observational study on passive leg raising and the autonomic nervous system.Physiological reports · 2022Observational
- Fluid bolus therapy in pediatric sepsis: a narrative review.European journal of medical research · 2022Review
- Safety and effects of volume loading during transesophageal echocardiography in the pre-procedural work-up for left atrial appendage closure.Cardiovascular ultrasound · 2021Article
- Effect of initial infusion rates of fluid resuscitation on outcomes in patients with septic shock: a historical cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2020Article
- Fluid resuscitation in sepsis: the great 30 mL per kg hoax.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) and intravascular volume management strategies in the critically ill.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2020Review
- Intravenous and Oral Fluid Therapy in Neonatal Calves With Diarrhea or Sepsis and in Adult Cattle.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2020Review
- Myocardial Strain and Cardiac Output are Preferable Measurements for Cardiac Dysfunction and Can Predict Mortality in Septic Mice.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Article
- Paediatric acute kidney injury: can we match therapy with resources around the world?Intensive care medicine · 2019Article
- Compliance With the National SEP-1 Quality Measure and Association With Sepsis Outcomes: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Critical care medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Resuscitation of septic patients by means of one or more fluid boluses is recommended by guidelines from multiple relevant organizations and as a component of surviving sepsis campaigns. The technique is considered a key and life-saving intervention during the initial treatment of severe sepsis in children and adults. Such recommendations, however, are only based on expert opinion and lack adequate experimental or controlled human evidence. Despite these limitations, fluid bolus therapy (20 to 40 ml/kg) is widely practiced and is currently considered a cornerstone of the management of sepsis. In this pointof-view critique, we will argue that such therapy has weak physiological support, has limited experimental support, and is at odds with emerging observational data in several subgroups of critically ill patients or those having major abdominal surgery. Finally, we will argue that this paradigm is now challenged by the findings of a large randomized controlled trial in septic children. In the present article, we contend that the concept of large fluid bolus resuscitation in sepsis needs to be investigated further.
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.