Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36949459›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2023

Comparison of clinical outcomes between aggressive and non-aggressive intravenous hydration for acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xiu-Wei Li, Chien-Ho Wang, Jhih-Wei Dai, Shu-Han Tsao, Po-Hsi Wang, Cheng-Chen Tai, Rong-Nan Chien, Shih-Chieh Shao, Edward Chia-Cheng Lai

Open access · goldFull text readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Xiu-Wei LiDivision of Hepatogastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Chien-Ho WangCollege of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Jhih-Wei DaiCollege of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Shu-Han TsaoCollege of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Po-Hsi WangDepartment of Nephrology, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Cheng-Chen TaiMedical Library, Department of Medical Education, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Rong-Nan ChienDivision of Hepatogastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Shih-Chieh ShaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan. scshao@cgmh.org.tw.
Edward Chia-Cheng LaiSchool of Pharmacy, Institute of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital · TWLinkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital · TWChang Gung University · TWNational Cheng Kung University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent practice guidelines for optimal infusion rates during early intravenous hydration in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) remain inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare treatment outcomes between aggressive and non-aggressive intravenous hydration in severe and non-severe AP.

methodsThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on November 23, 2022, and hand-searched the reference lists of included RCTs, relevant review articles and clinical guidelines. We included RCTs that compared clinical outcomes from aggressive and non-aggressive intravenous hydration in AP. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model for participants with severe AP and non-severe AP. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and several secondary outcomes included fluid-related complications, clinical improvement and APACHE II scores within 48 h.

resultsWe included a total of 9 RCTs with 953 participants. The meta-analysis indicated that, compared to non-aggressive intravenous hydration, aggressive intravenous hydration significantly increased mortality risk in severe AP (pooled RR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.37, 4.40), while the result in non-severe AP was inconclusive (pooled RR: 2.26, 95% CI: 0.54, 9.44). However, aggressive intravenous hydration significantly increased fluid-related complication risk in both severe (pooled RR: 2.22, 95% CI 1.36, 3.63) and non-severe AP (pooled RR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.53, 6.93). The meta-analysis indicated worse APACHE II scores (pooled mean difference: 3.31, 95% CI: 1.79, 4.84) in severe AP, and no increased likelihood of clinical improvement (pooled RR:1.20, 95% CI: 0.63, 2.29) in non-severe AP. Sensitivity analyses including only RCTs with goal-directed fluid therapy after initial fluid resuscitation therapy yielded consistent results.

conclusionsAggressive intravenous hydration increased the mortality risk in severe AP, and fluid-related complication risk in both severe and non-severe AP. More conservative intravenous fluid resuscitation protocols for AP are suggested.

Indexed as

PancreatitisAdministration, IntravenousFluid TherapyHumansResuscitationTreatment OutcomeAcute pancreatitisAggressive intravenous hydrationMeta-analysisMortalitySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36949459
PMCPMC10035244
OpenAlexW4353034883

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read63
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.