Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33786225›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

An Evaluation of the Use of Aggressive Fluid Resuscitation in the Early Treatment of Sepsis Patients.

William N Payne, Alfred Tager, Mike Broce, Dany Tager, Marion Hoy, Hythem Abad

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

William N PayneEmergency Medicine, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, USA.
Alfred TagerEmergency Medicine, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, USA.
Mike BroceCAMC Education and Research Institute, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, USA.
Dany TagerInternal Medicine, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, USA.
Marion HoyCAMC Education and Research Institute, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, USA.
Hythem AbadEmergency Medicine, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, USA.
Charleston Area Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Fluid resuscitation is a critical aspect of the sepsis protocol with the usual initial dose being 30 mL per kilogram. Although this dose is well accepted in patients with normal cardiac function, there is some significant variation in clinical practice concerning the optimal fluid resuscitation in septic patients with underlying congestive heart failure (CHF). Many different approaches have been tried to best treat these patients by using lesser volumes of fluid. The purpose of this retrospective study is to attempt to better define optimal fluid resuscitation in congestive heart failure patients and whether standard fluid resuscitation exacerbates CHF in these cases. Methods This was a retrospective study involving patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED) during the time period of September of 2016 through March of 2019 with a primary diagnosis of sepsis and pre-existing CHF. Data collected from the data warehouse and patient charts included demographics, total amount of fluid received in the ED and outcome data. Evidence of fluid overload (chest X-ray [CXR] evidence, rising B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP], or use of diuretics), was evaluated with respect to in-hospital mortality, white blood cell (WBC) count and comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], hypertension and coronary artery disease). Results There were 422 patients included in the cohort. Of the 422, 113 (26.8%) patients showed evidence of fluid overload on CXR during hospital stay and received diuretics and therefore considered in the CHF exacerbation group. The patients that experienced CHF exacerbation were significantly older (mean ± SD, 70.9 ± 11.8 years versus 67.4 ± 15.1 years, p=0.014). Patients with exacerbation also received more fluid (median and interquartile range, 3.0, 2:5.5 L versus 2.0, 1:4.3 L, p=0.017). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for fluid to predict exacerbation resulted in an area under the curve of 0.59 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.52 to 0.65, p=0.012. The Youden Index was used to determine an optimal cutoff value of 2.6 L. The percentage of patients in the exacerbation group above the threshold was significantly higher (57.3%) than those without exacerbation (43.3%), p=0.019. Following multivariate analysis, age greater than 60 (odds ratio [OR]: 2.5; CI: 1.4-4.6, p=0.003) and fluid cutoff of 2.6 L (OR: 1.9; CI: 1.2-3.1, p=0.007) were both found to be independent predictors of CHF exacerbation. There was no significant difference in mortality based on the total fluid received in the ED. Conclusion The findings of this study showed that septic patients with pre-existing CHF who received more than 2.6 L of fluid in the ED were 90% more likely to develop symptoms of CHF exacerbation with no evidence of lowering mortality compared to the group that received less than 2.6 L. Our data supports the practice of limiting total fluid resuscitation in CHF to 2.6 L and reconfirms the idea that fluid resuscitation for patients with CHF needs to be individualized.

Indexed as

chf exacerbationcongestive heart failurefluid resuscitationsepsissepsis treatment

Identifiers

PMID33786225
PMCPMC7994009
OpenAlexW3132051141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.