Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35633423›Full record

ReviewAnnals of intensive care2022

Prediction of fluid responsiveness. What's new?

Xavier Monnet, Rui Shi, Jean-Louis Teboul

6 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of intensive care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 6 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 105 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
53.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT05627817 unknown statusnot on this map

Timing of Preload Responsiveness in Sepsis and Septic Shock

TypeobservationalSponsorBicetre HospitalRan2019 to 2023Enrolled100ConditionsSeptic Shock, Fluid Responsiveness
NCT06067516 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Fluid Resuscitation on Capillary Refilling Time and Organ Functions in Septic Shock

TypeobservationalSponsorSamsun UniversityRan2023 to 2026Enrolled44ConditionsSepsisArmsFluid resuscitations
NCT06123039 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Use of Heart-lung Interaction Parameters to Predict Haemodynamic Tolerance to the Open Lung Approach With Individualised PEEP During Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in the Operating Room

TypeobservationalSponsorHospital Universitario La FeRan2023 to 2025Enrolled72ConditionsAnesthesia, Perioperative/Postoperative Complications, Hypovolemia, Haemodynamic InstabilityArmsTidal Volume Challenge, Recruitment maneuver obtaining individualised PEEP
NCT06772038 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Dynamic Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness and Venous Congestion: Evolution of the VExUS Score During Volume Expansion

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorBicetre HospitalRan2025 to 2025Enrolled64ConditionsHemodynamic, Fluid Responsiveness, Venous Congestion, Fluid Challenge
NCT07397663 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Prediction of Intradialytic Hypotension at the Initiation of Continuous Venovenous Hemodiafiltration Using Multimodal Ultrasonographic and Hemodynamic Parameters in Intensive Care Unit Patients

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorBursa Yuksek Ihtisas Training and Research HospitalRan2026 to 2027Enrolled80ConditionsRenal Failure , Chronic, Intradialytic Hypotension, Critical Illness
NCT07438015 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

VEXUS-REA : Evaluation of Ultrasound Parameters of Venous Congestion in Patients in a Medical Intensive Care Unit

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de BesanconRan2026 to 2026Enrolled525ConditionsVenous CongestionArmsVenous ultrasound (inferior vena cava, portal vein, suprahepatic vein, and renal vein to calculate the VEXUS score, femoral vein and popliteal vein)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

105 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 251 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Hour-1 Sepsis Bundle: Updated Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Observational
  16. Observational
  17. Review
  18. Changes in COJournal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

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

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xavier MonnetAP-HP, Service de médecine intensive-réanimation, Hôpital de Bicêtre, DMU 4 CORREVE, Inserm UMR S_999, FHU SEPSIS, CARMAS, Université Paris-Saclay, 78 rue du Général Leclerc, 94270, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. xavier.monnet@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6820-2678
Rui ShiAP-HP, Service de médecine intensive-réanimation, Hôpital de Bicêtre, DMU 4 CORREVE, Inserm UMR S_999, FHU SEPSIS, CARMAS, Université Paris-Saclay, 78 rue du Général Leclerc, 94270, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Jean-Louis TeboulAP-HP, Service de médecine intensive-réanimation, Hôpital de Bicêtre, DMU 4 CORREVE, Inserm UMR S_999, FHU SEPSIS, CARMAS, Université Paris-Saclay, 78 rue du Général Leclerc, 94270, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Inserm · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the administration of fluid is the first treatment considered in almost all cases of circulatory failure, this therapeutic option poses two essential problems: the increase in cardiac output induced by a bolus of fluid is inconstant, and the deleterious effects of fluid overload are now clearly demonstrated. This is why many tests and indices have been developed to detect preload dependence and predict fluid responsiveness. In this review, we take stock of the data published in the field over the past three years. Regarding the passive leg raising test, we detail the different stroke volume surrogates that have recently been described to measure its effects using minimally invasive and easily accessible methods. We review the limits of the test, especially in patients with intra-abdominal hypertension. Regarding the end-expiratory occlusion test, we also present recent investigations that have sought to measure its effects without an invasive measurement of cardiac output. Although the limits of interpretation of the respiratory variation of pulse pressure and of the diameter of the vena cava during mechanical ventilation are now well known, several recent studies have shown how changes in pulse pressure variation itself during other tests reflect simultaneous changes in cardiac output, allowing these tests to be carried out without its direct measurement. This is particularly the case during the tidal volume challenge, a relatively recent test whose reliability is increasingly well established. The mini-fluid challenge has the advantage of being easy to perform, but it requires direct measurement of cardiac output, like the classic fluid challenge. Initially described with echocardiography, recent studies have investigated other means of judging its effects. We highlight the problem of their precision, which is necessary to evidence small changes in cardiac output. Finally, we point out other tests that have appeared more recently, such as the Trendelenburg manoeuvre, a potentially interesting alternative for patients in the prone position.

Indexed as

Cardiac outputFluid balanceFluid challengePassive leg raisingTidal volumeVolume expansion

Identifiers

PMID35633423
PMCPMC9148319
OpenAlexW4281719596

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.