[CVP - farewell? Please don't! : Comments on the S3 guidelines on "intravascular volume therapy in adults"].

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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. High Central Venous Pressure after Cardiac Surgery Might Depict Hemodynamic Deterioration Associated with Increased Morbidity and Mortality.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021
   Article
2. [Perioperative fluid management in major abdominal surgery].Der Anaesthesist · 2021
   Review
3. [Evidence-based interdisciplinary treatment of abdominal sepsis].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2019
   Review
4. [Early goal-directed therapy for septic shock : Systematic review and meta-analysis].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2016
   Article
5. [Central venous pressure - a safety parameter].Der Anaesthesist · 2015
   Article
6. [Central venous pressure: evidence or expert opinion?]Der Anaesthesist · 2015
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as