ArticlePloS one2013
Dynamic and volumetric variables reliably predict fluid responsiveness in a porcine model with pleural effusion.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of pulse pressure variation for predicting impairment of microcirculatory blood flow.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Improved heart hemodynamics after draining large-volume pleural effusion: a prospective cohort study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2018Observational
- Fluid loading and norepinephrine infusion mask the left ventricular preload decrease induced by pleural effusion.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ability of stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV) and global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) for prediction of fluid responsiveness in presence of pleural effusion is unknown. The aim of the present study was to challenge the ability of SVV, PPV and GEDV to predict fluid responsiveness in a porcine model with pleural effusions.
methodsPigs were studied at baseline and after fluid loading with 8 ml kg(-1) 6% hydroxyethyl starch. After withdrawal of 8 ml kg(-1) blood and induction of pleural effusion up to 50 ml kg(-1) on either side, measurements at baseline and after fluid loading were repeated. Cardiac output, stroke volume, central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary occlusion pressure (PAOP) were obtained by pulmonary thermodilution, whereas GEDV was determined by transpulmonary thermodilution. SVV and PPV were monitored continuously by pulse contour analysis.
resultsPleural effusion was associated with significant changes in lung compliance, peak airway pressure and stroke volume in both responders and non-responders. At baseline, SVV, PPV and GEDV reliably predicted fluid responsiveness (area under the curve 0.85 (p<0.001), 0.88 (p<0.001), 0.77 (p = 0.007). After induction of pleural effusion the ability of SVV, PPV and GEDV to predict fluid responsiveness was well preserved and also PAOP was predictive. Threshold values for SVV and PPV increased in presence of pleural effusion.
conclusionsIn this porcine model, bilateral pleural effusion did not affect the ability of SVV, PPV and GEDV to predict fluid responsiveness.
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.