ArticlePloS one2018
Fluid administration rate for uncontrolled intraabdominal hemorrhage in swine.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conditional Treatment Effect Analysis of Two Infusion Rates for Fluid Challenges in Critically Ill Patients: A Secondary Analysis of Balanced Solution versus Saline in Intensive Care Study (BaSICS) Trial.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Trial
- A model of anaerobic tissue perfusion during trauma-Lactate trajectory curvature can determine recovery.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- A prospective, observational study of non-invasive venous waveform analysis (NIVA) for the detection of acute low volume blood loss in humans.Journal of clinical anesthesia · 2025Observational
- An injectable, expandable polyacrylamide cryogel decreases blood loss and improves survival in a porcine model of junctional hemorrhage.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Hemodynamic Parameters in the Assessment of Fluid Status in a Porcine Hemorrhage and Resuscitation Model.Anesthesiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe hypothesized that slow crystalloid resuscitation would result in less blood loss and a smaller hemoglobin decrease compared to a rapid resuscitation during uncontrolled hemorrhage.
methodsAnesthetized, splenectomized domestic swine underwent hepatic lobar hemitransection. Lactated Ringers was given at 150 or 20 mL/min IV (rapid vs. slow, respectively, N = 12 per group; limit of 100 mL/kg). Primary endpoints were blood loss and serum hemoglobin; secondary endpoints included survival, vital signs, coagulation parameters, and blood gases.
resultsThe slow group had a less blood loss (1.6 vs. 2.7 L, respectively) and a higher final hemoglobin concentration (6.0 vs. 3.4 g/dL).
conclusionsUsing a fixed volume of crystalloid resuscitation in this porcine model of uncontrolled intraabdominal hemorrhage, a slow IV infusion rate produced less blood loss and a smaller hemoglobin decrease compared to rapid infusion.
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.