ReviewOpen access emergency medicine : OAEM2022
Fluid Resuscitation in Patients Presenting with Sepsis: Current Insights.
Review in Open access emergency medicine : OAEM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a machine-learning risk stratification tool for vasoactive medication need after two-bolus fluid resuscitation in pediatric suspected sepsis.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Association of Albumin Infusion With Differential Response in Pediatric Sepsis and Septic Shock: Retrospective Analysis Using a U.S. Multicenter 2012-2018 Dataset.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2026Article
- Liberal Versus Restrictive Fluid Therapy in the Early Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- YiQi-HuoXue prescription ameliorates LPS-induced sepsis-associated encephalopathy via VCAM-1-mediated microglial efferocytosis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Sepsis in multimorbidity: a domain-based framework for systemic vulnerability and precision care.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Development of a Piezoelectric Immunosensor to Rapidly Measure Prohibitin‑1 as a Prognostic Biomarker for Sepsis and Other Serious Infectious Diseases.ACS applied electronic materials · 2025Article
- Subphenotyping sepsis based on organ interaction trajectory using a deep temporal graph clustering model: a retrospective cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- The Clinical View of Sepsis-Associated AKI: How Basic Science Can Help Solve This Problem.Seminars in nephrology · 2025Review
- Association of the Lactate/Albumin Ratio with Mortality and Hypovolemia in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Optimal time and volume of fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis: a nationwide multicenter cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Conservative fluid resuscitation protocol does not reduce the incidence of reoperation for bleeding after emergency CABG.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Review
- Revolution in sepsis: a symptoms-based to a systems-based approach?Journal of biomedical science · 2024Review
- Rethinking Fluid Responsiveness during Septic Shock: Ameliorate Accuracy of Noninvasive Cardiac Output Measurements through Evaluation of Arterial Biomechanical Properties.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- New Insights into the Fluid Management in Patients with Septic Shock.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intravenous (IV) fluid resuscitation is a key component of the initial resuscitation of septic shock, with international consensus guidelines suggesting the administration of at least 30mL/kg of isotonic crystalloid fluid. The rationale is to restore circulating fluid volume and optimise stroke volume. It is acknowledged that there is a paucity of high-level evidence to support this strategy, with most studies being observational or retrospective in design. In the past decade, evidence has emerged that a large positive fluid balance is associated with worse outcomes among patients with septic shock in intensive care who have already received initial resuscitation. Randomised trials undertaken in low-income countries have found increased mortality among patients with sepsis and hypoperfusion administered a larger fluid volume as part of initial resuscitation, however, translating these findings to other settings is not possible. This uncertainty has led to variation in practice with some advocating a more conservative fluid strategy coupled with the earlier introduction of vasopressors for haemodynamic support. This question is the subject of several ongoing clinical trials. This article summarises the current state of the evidence for IV fluid resuscitation in septic shock and provides guidance for practitioners in the face of our evolving understanding of this important area.
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.