Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36329266›Full record

ReviewIntensive care medicine experimental2022

Pathophysiology of fluid administration in critically ill patients.

Antonio Messina, Jan Bakker, Michelle Chew, Daniel De Backer, Olfa Hamzaoui, Glenn Hernandez, Sheila Nainan Myatra, Xavier Monnet, Marlies Ostermann, Michael Pinsky and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07625995 (Feasibility and Safety of Targeting Neutral vs Liberal Fluid Balance in Traumatic Brain Injured Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07625995 phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility and Safety of Targeting Neutral vs Liberal Fluid Balance in Traumatic Brain Injured Patients: a Phase II Randomized Controlled Trial - LIMIT-TBI Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorErasme University HospitalRan2025 to 2029Enrolled88ConditionsTraumatic Brain Injury, Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Acute Brain Injury, Neurocritical CareArmsNeutral Fluid Balance Strategy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Personalised fluid therapy in septic shock.Annals of intensive care · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. SIGHCritical care (London, England) · 2025
    Article
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

12 authors.

Antonio MessinaIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, Rozzano, 20089, Milan, Italy. antonio.messina@humanitas.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9744-1659
Jan BakkerNYU Langone Health and Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, USA.
Michelle ChewDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Daniel De BackerDepartment of Intensive Care, CHIREC Hospitals, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Olfa HamzaouiService de Reanimation PolyvalenteHopital Antoine Béclère, Hopitaux Universitaires Paris-Saclay, Clamart, France.
Glenn HernandezDepartamento de Medicina Intensiva, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Sheila Nainan MyatraDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Xavier MonnetHôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Sud, Hôpital de Bicêtre, Medical Intensive Care Unit, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, Paris, France.
Marlies OstermannDepartment of Intensive Care, King's College London, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.
Michael PinskyDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jean-Louis TeboulHôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Sud, Hôpital de Bicêtre, Medical Intensive Care Unit, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, Paris, France.
Maurizio CecconiIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, Rozzano, 20089, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluid administration is a cornerstone of treatment of critically ill patients. The aim of this review is to reappraise the pathophysiology of fluid therapy, considering the mechanisms related to the interplay of flow and pressure variables, the systemic response to the shock syndrome, the effects of different types of fluids administered and the concept of preload dependency responsiveness. In this context, the relationship between preload, stroke volume (SV) and fluid administration is that the volume infused has to be large enough to increase the driving pressure for venous return, and that the resulting increase in end-diastolic volume produces an increase in SV only if both ventricles are operating on the steep part of the curve. As a consequence, fluids should be given as drugs and, accordingly, the dose and the rate of administration impact on the final outcome. Titrating fluid therapy in terms of overall volume infused but also considering the type of fluid used is a key component of fluid resuscitation. A single, reliable, and feasible physiological or biochemical parameter to define the balance between the changes in SV and oxygen delivery (i.e., coupling "macro" and "micro" circulation) is still not available, making the diagnosis of acute circulatory dysfunction primarily clinical.

Identifiers

PMID36329266
PMCPMC9633880

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.