ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2015
Prehospital fluid management of abdominal organ trauma patients--a matched pair analysis.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prehospital coagulation management and fluid replacement therapy in patients with multiple and/or severe injuries - A systematic review and clinical practice guideline update.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Pooled it
- Association between prehospital fluid resuscitation with crystalloids and outcome of trauma patients in Asia by a cross-national multicenter cohort study.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Prehospital volume resuscitation--Did evidence defeat the crystalloid dogma? An analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU® 2002-2012.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2016Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSevere bleeding after trauma frequently leads to a poor outcome. Prehospital fluid replacement therapy is considered an important primary treatment option. We conducted a retrospective matched pair analysis to assess the influence of prehospital fluid replacement volume on the clinical course of patients with solid abdominal organ trauma.
methodsData were analyzed from 51,425 patients in TraumaRegister DGU® of the German Trauma Society. Inclusion criteria were as follows: injury severity score ≥ 16 points, primary admission, age ≥ 16 years, no isolated brain injury, transfusion of at least one unit of packed red blood cells (pRBCs), and systolic blood pressure ≥ 20 mmHg at the accident site. The patients were divided into "low-volume" (0-1000 ml) and "high-volume" (≥ 1,500 ml) groups according to the matched pair criteria. In each group, 68 patients met the inclusion criteria.
resultsHigher volume in fluid replacement was associated with increased need for transfusion (pRBCs: low-volume: 7.71 units, high-volume: 9.16 units; p = 0.074) and with by trend reduced clotting ability (prothrombin time: low-volume: 71.47 %, high-volume: 66.47 %; p = 0.27). The percentage of patients in shock (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg) upon admission was equal in the two groups (25.0 %; p = 1). The mortality rate was discretely higher in the high-volume group (low-volume: 11.8 %, high-volume: 19.1 %; p = 0.089).
conclusionsExcessive prehospital fluid replacement is able to lead in an increased mortality rate in patients with solid abdominal organ injury. Our results support the concept of restrained fluid replacement in the preclinical treatment of severe trauma patients.
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.