Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29500701›Full record

GuidelineIntensive care medicine2018

Fluid therapy in neurointensive care patients: ESICM consensus and clinical practice recommendations.

Mauro Oddo, Daniele Poole, Raimund Helbok, Geert Meyfroidt, Nino Stocchetti, Pierre Bouzat, Maurizio Cecconi, Thomas Geeraerts, Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Hervé Quintard and 12 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readConsensus StatementPractice GuidelineReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in Intensive care medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07625995 (Feasibility and Safety of Targeting Neutral vs Liberal Fluid Balance in Traumatic Brain Injured Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 72 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
13.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT07625995 phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility and Safety of Targeting Neutral vs Liberal Fluid Balance in Traumatic Brain Injured Patients: a Phase II Randomized Controlled Trial - LIMIT-TBI Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorErasme University HospitalRan2025 to 2029Enrolled88ConditionsTraumatic Brain Injury, Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Acute Brain Injury, Neurocritical CareArmsNeutral Fluid Balance Strategy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 172 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Editorial: Advances in neurocritical care.Frontiers in medicine · 2026
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

22 authors at 19 institutions in 10 countries.

Mauro OddoDepartment of Medical-Surgical Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), University of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon 46, BH 08.623, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland. mauro.oddo@chuv.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-6155-2525
Daniele PooleAnesthesia and Intensive Care Operative Unit, S. Martino Hospital, Belluno, Italy.
Raimund HelbokNeurological Intensive Care Unit, Department of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Geert MeyfroidtDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Louvain, Belgium.
Nino StocchettiNeuroscience Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda-Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Pierre BouzatDepartment of Anesthesia and Critical Care, CHU Grenoble Alpes, 38000, Grenoble, France.
Maurizio CecconiDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, St. George's University Hospital, London, UK.
Thomas GeeraertsDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Toulouse University Hospital, University Toulouse 3-Paul Sabatier, 31059, Toulouse, France.
Ignacio Martin-LoechesDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, St James's University Hospital, James's St, Ushers, P.O. Box 580, Dublin 8, Ireland.
Hervé QuintardService de Réanimation Médico-chirurgicale, Hôpital Pasteur 2, Université Côte d'Azur, CHU de Nice, 06000, Nice, France.
Fabio Silvio TacconeDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Romergryko G GeocadinNeurosciences Critical Care, Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Neurology, and Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Claude HemphillDepartment of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Carole IchaiService de Réanimation Polyvalente, Hôpital Pasteur 2, CHU de Nice, 30 Voie Romaine, CS 51069, 06001, Nice Cedex 1, France.
David MenonDivision of Anaesthesia, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 93, Hills Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB2 2QQ, UK.
Jean-François PayenDepartment of Anesthesia and Critical Care, CHU Grenoble Alpes, 38000, Grenoble, France.
Anders PernerDepartment of Intensive Care 4131, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Martin SmithDepartment of Neuroanesthesia and Neurocritical Care, The National Hospital for Neurosurgery and Neurology, University College London Hospitals, London, UK.
José SuarezNeurosciences Critical Care, Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Neurology, and Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Walter VidettaHospital Nacional Professor Alejandro Posadas, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Elisa R ZanierDepartment of Neurosciences, IRCCS-Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe CiterioSchool of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRJohns Hopkins University · USAddenbrooke's Hospital · GBAzienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo · ITCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCopenhagen University Hospital · DKHospital Posadas · ARInnsbruck Medical University · ATKU Leuven · BEMario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research · ITRoyal London Hospital · GBSt George's Hospital · GBSt. James's Hospital · IEUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BEUniversité Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier · FRUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CHUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo report the ESICM consensus and clinical practice recommendations on fluid therapy in neurointensive care patients.

designA consensus committee comprising 22 international experts met in October 2016 during ESICM LIVES2016. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussions between the members of the committee subsequently served to discuss and develop the consensus process.

methodsPopulation, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles generated. The consensus focused on three main topics: (1) general fluid resuscitation and maintenance in neurointensive care patients, (2) hyperosmolar fluids for intracranial pressure control, (3) fluid management in delayed cerebral ischemia after subarachnoid haemorrhage. After an extensive literature search, the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system were applied to assess the quality of evidence (from high to very low), to formulate treatment recommendations as strong or weak, and to issue best practice statements when applicable. A modified Delphi process based on the integration of evidence provided by the literature and expert opinions-using a sequential approach to avoid biases and misinterpretations-was used to generate the final consensus statement.

resultsThe final consensus comprises a total of 32 statements, including 13 strong recommendations and 17 weak recommendations. No recommendations were provided for two statements.

conclusionsWe present a consensus statement and clinical practice recommendations on fluid therapy for neurointensive care patients.

Indexed as

Fluid TherapyAdultBrain DiseasesComaConsensusCritical CareCritical IllnessHumansIntensive Care UnitsTelecommunicationsEvidence‐based medicineFluid therapyGuidelinesHypertonicIntracerebral haemorrhageMannitolNeurointensive careStrokeSubarachnoid haemorrhageTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID29500701
OpenAlexW2790937501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.