Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28729329›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2017

Fluids in Sepsis and Septic Shock (FISSH): protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.

Bram Rochwerg, Tina Millen, Peggy Austin, Michelle Zeller, Frédérick D'Aragon, Roman Jaeschke, Marie-Hélène Masse, Sangeeta Mehta, Francois Lamontagne, Maureen Meade and 3 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02748382 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

Fluids in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcMaster UniversityRan2016 to 2017Enrolled50ConditionsSepsis, Septic ShockArmshigher chloride crystalloid, higher chloride albumin, lower chloride crystalloid, lower chloride albumin
NCT06840756 phase4recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Donor-recipient Sex-matched Versus Sex-mismatched Red Blood Cell Transfusion on Outcomes in Critically Ill Adult Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorMichelle ZellerRan2025 to 2029Enrolled11,082ConditionsRed Blood Cell Transfusions, Sex Differences, Health Services, Critically Ill Intensive Care Unit PatientsArmsSex-mismatched red blood cell transfusions, Sex-matched red blood cell transfusions
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. "I don't get no respect": the role of chloride in acute kidney injury.American journal of physiology. Renal physiology · 2019
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Hyperchloraemia in sepsis.Annals of intensive care · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Bram RochwergDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Tina MillenDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Peggy AustinDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Michelle ZellerDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Frédérick D'AragonCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke et Faculté de Médecine et des Sciences dela Santé, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Roman JaeschkeDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Marie-Hélène Masse
Sangeeta MehtaMount Sinai Hospital and Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Francois LamontagneCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke et Faculté de Médecine et des Sciences dela Santé, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Maureen MeadeDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Gordon GuyattDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Deborah J CookDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8293-7061
Canadian Critical Care Trials Group
Impact · CAMcMaster University · CAUniversité de Sherbrooke · CAMount Sinai Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObservational evidence suggests physiological benefits and lower mortality with lower chloride solutions; however, 0.9% saline remains the most widely used fluid worldwide. Given uncertainty regarding the association of lower chloride on mortality, it is unlikely that practice will change without direct randomised clinical trial (RCT) evidence. This pilot RCT will investigate the feasibility of a large-scale trial directly comparing low chloride with high chloride fluids in patients with septic shock. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a randomised, concealed, blinded parallel-group multicentre pilot trial. We will include adult critically ill patients with septic shock, defined as ongoing hypotension despite 1 L of fluid, or a serum lactate >4 mmol/L, who are within 6 hours of hospital presentation or rapid response team activation. We will exclude patients if they have an aetiology of shock other than sepsis, if they have acute burn injury, elevated intracranial pressure, intent to withdraw life support or previous enrolment in this or a competing trial. Following informed consent, patients will be randomised to a low chloride fluid strategy or a high chloride fluid strategy for the duration of their ICU stay or until 30 days postrandomisation. Clinicians, patients, families and research staff will be blinded. The primary outcome for this trial will be feasibility, assessed by consent rate, recruitment success and protocol adherence. Patient-important clinical outcomes include mortality, receipt of renal replacement therapy, intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay and surrogate outcomes of incidence of acidosis, hyperkalaemia and acute kidney injury. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This pilot trial will test the feasibility of conducting the main trial, which will examine the effect of high versus low chloride fluids in patients with septic shock on patient-important outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02748382, registered 8 April 2016. PROTOCOL DATE: 1 July 2016.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCanadaCritical IllnessFemaleFluid TherapyHumansIntensive Care UnitsLactic AcidLength of StayLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsRenal Replacement TherapyLactic AcidSodium Chloridechlorideintravenous fluidsRCTresuscitationsepsis

Identifiers

PMID28729329
PMCPMC5642672
OpenAlexW2737417474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.