Trial reportPhysiological reports2021
Do ScvO
Trial report in Physiological reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Variation in central venous oxygen saturation to evaluate fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Do ScvOPhysiological reports · 2021Trial
- Assessing fluid responsiveness with central venous oxygen saturation: the complex relationship between oxygenation and perfusion.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Changes in central venous-to-arterial PCOCritical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- Recent advances in cardiorespiratory monitoring in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients.Journal of intensive care · 2024Review
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
objectiveThe present study investigates whether ScvO
designA monocentric prospective clinical study.
settingAn intensive care division in a tertiary hospital. PATIENTS: The inclusion criteria were elective postoperative cardiac surgery patients who were over 18 years old, deeply sedated, mechanically ventilated and needed volume expansion (VE). Fluid responders (R) were defined as patients who increased their left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (VTI) ≥15% after VE.
interventionIn patients included in this study, continuous ScvO MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsThirty-three consecutive patients were included in this study. In 15 patients with a positive PLR test (increase in VTI ≥15%), ScvO
conclusionsScvO
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.