Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37533810›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive medicine2023

Impact of initial fluid resuscitation volume on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure and septic shock.

Adam L Wiss, Bruce A Doepker, Brittany Hoyte, Logan M Olson, Kathryn A Disney, Eric M McLaughlin, Vincent Esguerra, Jessica L Elefritz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

8 authors.

Adam L WissDepartment of Pharmacy, Ascension Saint Thomas Hospital West, Nashville, TN 37205, USA.
Bruce A DoepkerDepartment of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Brittany HoyteDepartment of Pharmacy, Corewell Health, Grand Rapids, MI 49503, USA.
Logan M OlsonDepartment of Pharmacy, Nebraska Medicine, Omaha, NE 68105, USA.
Kathryn A DisneyDepartment of Pharmacy, Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Eric M McLaughlinCenter for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Vincent EsguerraDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Jessica L ElefritzDepartment of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Fluid resuscitation is a key treatment for sepsis, but limited data exists in patients with existing heart failure (HF) and septic shock. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of initial fluid resuscitation volume on outcomes in HF patients with reduced or mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) with septic shock. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective, cohort study included patients with known HF (LVEF ≤50%) presenting with septic shock. Patients were divided into two groups based on the volume of fluid resuscitation in the first 6 h; <30 mL/kg or ≥30 mL/kg. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality or renal replacement therapy (RRT) within 7 days. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury (AKI), initiation of mechanical ventilation, and length of stay (LOS). All related data were collected and compared between the two groups. A generalized logistic mixed model was used to assess the association between fluid groups and the primary outcome while adjusting for baseline LVEF, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, inappropriate empiric antibiotics, and receipt of corticosteroids. Results: One hundred and fifty-four patients were included (93 patients in <30 mL/kg group and 61 patients in ≥30 mL/kg group). The median weight-based volume in the first 6 h was 17.7 (12.2-23.0) mL/kg in the <30 mL/kg group Conclusions: In patients with known reduced or mildly reduced LVEF presenting with septic shock, no difference was detected for in-hospital mortality or RRT in patients who received ≥30 mL/kg of resuscitation fluid compared to less fluid, although this study was underpowered to detect a difference. Importantly, ≥30 mL/kg fluid did not result in a higher need for mechanical ventilation.

Indexed as

Fluid resuscitationHeart failureSepsisSeptic shock

Identifiers

PMID37533810
PMCPMC10391556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.