SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2019
Value of respiratory variation of aortic peak velocity in predicting children receiving mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mini fluid challenge versus passive leg raising test for predicting fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing children.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-derived velocity variations predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill pediatric oncology patients.Physiological reports · 2026Article
- Use of preload responsiveness tests in pediatric intensive care units: A nationwide prospective clinical practice analysis.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Calibrated abdominal compression to assess fluid responsiveness in extremely and very preterm neonates: a pilot study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- The role of the tidal volume challenge test in volume responsiveness assessment: a narrative review.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025Review
- Clinical value of calibrated abdominal compression plus transthoracic echocardiography to predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill infants: a diagnostic accuracy study.BMC pediatrics · 2025Observational
- Advances in Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Pediatric Acute Care Medicine.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2025Review
- Utility of Inferior Vena Cava Distensibility and Respiratory Variation in Peak Aortic Blood Flow Velocity to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in Children with Shock.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2023Observational
- Dynamic parameters for fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children: A systematic review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
- Recommendations for hemodynamic monitoring for critically ill children-expert consensus statement issued by the cardiovascular dynamics section of the European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC).Critical care (London, England) · 2020Article
- Prediction of Fluid Responsiveness by Stroke Volume Variation in Children Undergoing Fontan Operation.BioMed research international · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate volume assessment is crucial in children under fluid therapy. Over the last decade, respiratory variation of aortic peak velocity (△VPeak) has been applied in intensive care unit and surgeries to help clinicians guide fluid management. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to test diagnostic performance of △VPeak in predicting fluid responsiveness of ventilated children and to explore the potential factors that influence the accuracy of △VPeak.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane from inception to April 2019 that evaluated association between △VPeak and fluid responsiveness after fluid challenge in children receiving mechanical ventilation. Data synthesis was performed within the bivariate mixed-effects regression model modified for synthesis of diagnostic test data.
resultsEleven studies with a total of 302 pediatric patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of △VPeak was 0.89 (95%CI = 0.77 to 0.95) and 0.85 (95%CI = 0.77 to 0.91), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of △VPeak was 48 (95%CI = 15 to 155). SROC yielded an area under the curve of 0.91 (95%CI = 0.88-0.93). The △VPeak cutoff value was nearly conically symmetrical distribution and varied from 7 to 20%. After excluding several extreme studies, most data were centered between 12 and 13%. The medium and mean cutoff values of △VPeak were 12.2% and 12.7%, respectively. In subgroup analysis, compared to total data analysis, △VPeak performed weaker in the younger children group (mean ages < 25 months), with lower area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUSROC) of 0.80 (0.76 to 0.83), but stronger in the older children group (mean ages > 25 months), with AUSROC of 0.96 (0.94 to 0.97).
conclusionsOverall, △VPeak has a good ability in predicting fluid responsiveness of children receiving mechanical ventilation, but this ability decreases in younger children (mean age < 25 months). The optimal threshold of △VPeak to predict fluid responsiveness in ventilated children is reliable between 12 and 13%.
trial registrationThe study protocol was registered prospectively on PROSPERO no. CRD42019129361.
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.