ReviewIntensive care medicine experimental2016
Effects of volume resuscitation on the microcirculation in animal models of lipopolysaccharide sepsis: a systematic review.
Review in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of fluids on sublingual microcirculation: a point of view review.Annals of intensive care · 2025Review
- An ovine septic shock model of live bacterial infusion.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2024Article
- End organ perfusion and pediatric microcirculation assessment.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Increased tissue water in patients with severe sepsis affects tissue oxygenation measured by near-infrared spectroscopy: a prospective, observational case-control study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- The use of pulse pressure variation for predicting impairment of microcirculatory blood flow.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Review
- Microcirculation vs. Mitochondria-What to Target?Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- Fluid Bolus Therapy in Pediatric Sepsis: Current Knowledge and Future Direction.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2018Review
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 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent research has identified an increased rate of mortality associated with fluid bolus therapy for severe sepsis and septic shock, but the mechanisms are still not well understood. Fluid resuscitation therapy administered for sepsis and septic shock targets restoration of the macro-circulation, but the pathogenesis of sepsis is complex and includes microcirculatory dysfunction.
objectiveThe objective of the study is to systematically review data comparing the effects of different types of fluid resuscitation on the microcirculation in clinically relevant animal models of lipopolysaccharide-induced sepsis.
methodsA structured search of PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE for relevant publications from 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2015 was performed, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.
resultsThe number of published papers on sepsis and the microcirculation has increased steadily over the last 25 years. We identified 11 experimental animal studies comparing the effects of different fluid resuscitation regimens on the microcirculation. Heterogeneity precluded any meta-analysis.
conclusionsFew animal model studies have been published comparing the microcirculatory effects of different types of fluid resuscitation for sepsis and septic shock. Biologically relevant animal model studies remain necessary to enhance understanding regarding the mechanisms by which fluid resuscitation affects the microcirculation and to facilitate the transfer of basic science discoveries to clinical applications.
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.