ArticleCritical care explorations2023
Focused Cardiac Ultrasound Findings of Fluid Tolerance and Fluid Resuscitation in Septic Shock.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesCompliance with the fluid bonus component of the SEP-1 (severe sepsis and septic shock management) bundle remains poor due to concerns for iatrogenic harm from fluid overload. We sought to assess whether patients who received focused cardiac ultrasound (FCU) and were found to be fluid tolerant (FT) were more likely to receive the recommended 30 mL/kg fluid bolus within 3 hours of sepsis identification.
designRetrospective, observational cohort study.
settingUniversity-affiliated, tertiary-care hospital in the United States. PATIENTS: Emergency department patients presenting with septic shock from 2018 to 2021. The primary exposure was receipt of FCU with identification of fluid tolerance 3 hours from onset of septic shock.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsTwo hundred ninety-two of 1,024 patients with septic shock received FCU within 3 hours of sepsis onset. One hundred seventy-seven were determined to be FT. One hundred fifteen patients were determined to have poor fluid tolerance (pFT). FT patients were more likely to reach the recommended 30 mL/kg fluid bolus amount compared with pFT (FT 52.0% vs. pFT 31.3%, risk difference: 20.7%, [95% CI, 9.4-31.9]). Patients who did not receive FCU met the bolus requirement 34.3% of the time. FT patients received more fluid within 3 hours (FT 2,271 mL vs. pFT 1,646 mL, mean difference 625 mL [95% CI, 330-919]). Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between fluid tolerance FCU findings and compliance with 30 mL/kg bolus after adjustment for patient characteristics and markers of hemodynamic instability. FT with associated with a higher likelihood of meeting bolus requirement (odds ratio 2.17 [1.52-3.12]).
conclusionsPatients found to be FT by FCU were more likely to receive the recommended 30 mL/kg bolus in the SEP-1 bundle when compared with patients found with pFT or those that did not receive FCU. There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality, vasopressor requirement, or need for mechanical ventilation.
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.