ArticleCritical care (London, England)2013
Pavane for a pulse pressure variation defunct.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pleth variability index or stroke volume optimization during open abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2018Trial
- The effect of fluid resuscitation on the effective circulating volume in patients undergoing liver surgery: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2018Trial
- Heart-Lung Interactions in Combined Distributive Shock and ARDS: Applied Cardiopulmonary Physiology at the Bedside.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Performance of a Machine Learning Algorithm to Predict Hypotension in Spontaneously Breathing Non-Ventilated Post-Anesthesia and ICU Patients.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Intraoperative Hypotension Prediction-A Proactive Perioperative Hemodynamic Management-A Literature Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Cardiopulmonary interactions-which monitoring tools to use?Frontiers in physiology · 2023Review
- Observational study on passive leg raising and the autonomic nervous system.Physiological reports · 2022Observational
- Perioperative hemodynamic optimization: from guidelines to implementation-an experts' opinion paper.Annals of intensive care · 2021Review
- Right ventricular stroke volume assessed by pulmonary artery pulse contour analysis.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2020Article
- Intraoperative hypotension and its prediction.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2019Review
- The haemodynamic effects of crystalloid and colloid volume resuscitation on primary, derived and efficiency variables in post-CABG patients.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2019Article
- Article
- Long live dynamic parameters!Critical care (London, England) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemodynamic management of critically ill patients in the ICU or high-risk patients in the operating room has paradoxically shown progress in terms of outcome after the systematic application of volume responsiveness/flow optimization based on pulse pressure variation and/or stroke volume variation during controlled, positive-pressure ventilation in patients without spontaneous respiratory efforts. This assessment of circulatory optimization should ideally be based on an exhaustive, predictive and coherent physiological understanding of the cardiovascular system model. This paper sketches the extremely complex physiological background of the concept of volume responsiveness, concluding that it is not a reliable means of guiding hemodynamic optimization because it is based on a nonexhaustive, nonpredictive and incoherent physiological model.
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.