Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30072710›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Nephrology2018

Intravenous fluid therapy in critically ill adults.

Simon Finfer, John Myburgh, Rinaldo Bellomo

Erratum issued 3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 106 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05961631 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

The Use of Bio-Electrical Impedance Analysis Derived Parameters for Evaluating Fluid Accumulation in Critically Ill Patients Admitted to ICU: a Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorIndonesia UniversityRan2023 to 2025Enrolled200ConditionsCritically IllArmsBio-electrical Impedance Analysis
NCT05964283 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Physician Knowledge Level of Intravenous Fluid Therapy in Hospitals: A Cross-Sectional Study

TypeobservationalSponsorIndonesia UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled372ConditionsKnowledge Level, Intravenous Fluid TherapyArmsQuestionnaire
NCT06478797 phase2unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Adrenaline in Early Sepsis Resuscitation in Children- A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study in the Emergency Department (ANDES CHILD)

TypeinterventionalSponsorNATALIA LOPERA MUNERARan2024 to 2025Enrolled40ConditionsSepsisArmsFluid, Adrenalin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

106 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Simon FinferThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. sfinfer@georgeinstitute.org.au.
John MyburghThe George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Rinaldo BellomoSchool of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intravenous fluid therapy is one of the most common interventions in acutely ill patients. Each day, over 20% of patients in intensive care units (ICUs) receive intravenous fluid resuscitation, and more than 30% receive fluid resuscitation during their first day in the ICU. Virtually all hospitalized patients receive intravenous fluid to maintain hydration and as diluents for drug administration. Until recently, the amount and type of fluids administered were based on a theory described over 100 years ago, much of which is inconsistent with current physiological data and emerging knowledge. Despite their widespread use, various fluids for intravenous administration have entered clinical practice without a robust evaluation of their safety and efficacy. High-quality, investigator-initiated studies have revealed that some of these fluids have unacceptable toxicity; as a result, several have been withdrawn from the market (while others, controversially, are still in use). The belief that dehydration and hypovolaemia can cause or worsen kidney and other vital organ injury has resulted in liberal approaches to fluid therapy and the view that fluid overload and tissue oedema are 'normal' during critical illness; this is quite possibly harming patients. Increasing evidence indicates that restrictive fluid strategies might improve outcomes.

Indexed as

Physiological PhenomenaAdministration, IntravenousAdultColloidsCritical CareCritical IllnessCrystalloid SolutionsFluid TherapyHumansHypovolemiaKidney DiseasesModels, TheoreticalResuscitationWater-Electrolyte BalanceColloidsCrystalloid Solutions

Identifiers

PMID30072710

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.