Trial reportChest2015
Response to fluid boluses in the fluid and catheter treatment trial.
Trial report in Chest, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05612529 (Ultrasonographic Predictors of Intravenous Fluid Responsiveness in Septic Shock and Its Correlation to Central Venous Pressure), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 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.
Ultrasonographic Predictors of Intravenous Fluid Responsiveness in Septic Shock and Its Correlation to Central Venous Pressure
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The haemodynamic dilemma in emergency care: Is fluid responsiveness the answer? A systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Non-interventional follow-up versus fluid bolus in RESPONSE to oliguria in hemodynamically stable critically ill patients: a randomized controlled pilot trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Trial
- Effect of a fluid bolus on cardiovascular collapse among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation (PrePARE): a randomised controlled trial.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2019Trial
- Plasma expansion and renal perfusion in critical COVID-19 with AKI: A prospective case control study.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Hemodynamic Support in Sepsis.Anesthesiology · 2024Review
- Severe Lung Dysfunction and Pulmonary Blood Flow during Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- [Fluid and vasopressor therapy in sepsis].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2023Article
- The ability of pulse oximetry-derived peripheral perfusion index to detect fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock.Journal of anesthesia · 2021Article
- Assessment of Volume Status and Fluid Responsiveness in Small Animals.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
- Noninterventional follow-up vs fluid bolus in RESPONSE to oliguria-The RESPONSE trial protocol and statistical analysis plan.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2020Article
- Liberal versus restrictive fluid therapy in critically ill patients.Intensive care medicine · 2019Article
- Fluid administration for acute circulatory dysfunction using basic monitoring: narrative review and expert panel recommendations from an ESICM task force.Intensive care medicine · 2019Article
- Oliguria in critically ill patients: a narrative review.Journal of nephrology · 2018Review
- Personalised fluid resuscitation in the ICU: still a fluid concept?Critical care (London, England) · 2017Review
- Fluid resuscitation in human sepsis: Time to rewrite history?Annals of intensive care · 2017Review
- Understanding oliguria in the critically ill.Intensive care medicine · 2017Article
- Does this critically ill patient with oliguria need more fluids, a vasopressor, or neither?Intensive care medicine · 2017Article
- Article
- Is the concept of fluid responsiveness evidence-based?Intensive care 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent emphasis has been placed on methods to predict fluid responsiveness, but the usefulness of using fluid boluses to increase cardiac index in critically ill patients with ineffective circulation or oliguria remains unclear.
methodsThis retrospective analysis investigated hemodynamic responses of critically ill patients in the ARDS Network Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) who were given protocol-based fluid boluses. Fluid responsiveness was defined as ≥ 15% increase in cardiac index after a 15 mL/kg fluid bolus.
resultsA convenience sample of 127 critically ill patients enrolled in FACTT was analyzed for physiologic responses to 569 protocolized crystalloid or albumin boluses given for shock, low urine output (UOP), or low pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP). There were significant increases in mean central venous pressure (9.9 ± 4.5 to 11.1 ± 4.8 mm Hg, P < .0001) and mean PAOP (11.6 ± 3.6 to 13.3 ± 4.3 mm Hg, P < .0001) following fluid boluses. However, there were no significant changes in UOP, and there were clinically small changes in heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and cardiac index. Only 23% of fluid boluses led to a ≥ 15% change in cardiac index. There was no significant difference in the frequency of fluid responsiveness between boluses given for shock or oliguria vs boluses given only for low PAOP (24.0% vs 21.8%, P = .59). There were no significant differences in 90-day survival, need for hemodialysis, or return to unassisted breathing between patients defined as fluid responders and fluid nonresponders.
conclusionsIn this cohort of critically ill patients with ARDS who were previously resuscitated, the rate of fluid responsiveness was low, and fluid boluses only led to small hemodynamic changes.
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.