Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38095714›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2024

Lung ultrasound-guided fluid resuscitation in neonatal septic shock: A randomized controlled trial.

Dabin Huang, Chuming You, Xiaowei Mai, Lin Li, Qiong Meng, Zhenyu Liang

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06144463 (Study on the Application Value of Fluid Resuscitation Guided by Lung Ultrasound in Neonatal Septic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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.

NCT06144463 nacompletednot on this map

Study on the Application Value of Fluid Resuscitation Guided by Lung Ultrasound in Neonatal Septic Shock

TypeinterventionalSponsorGuangdong Second Provincial General HospitalRan2022 to 2023Enrolled72ConditionsSeptic ShockArmslung ultrasound-guided fluid resuscitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dabin HuangDepartment of Pediatrics, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, 466 Newport Middle Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510317, Guangdong Province, China.
Chuming YouDepartment of Pediatrics, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, 466 Newport Middle Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510317, Guangdong Province, China.
Xiaowei MaiDepartment of Emergency, Guangzhou Panyu Central Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Lin LiDepartment of Pediatrics, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, 466 Newport Middle Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510317, Guangdong Province, China.
Qiong MengDepartment of Pediatrics, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, 466 Newport Middle Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510317, Guangdong Province, China. mengqiong1969@163.com.
Zhenyu LiangDepartment of Pediatrics, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, 466 Newport Middle Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510317, Guangdong Province, China. liangzhenyu0823@163.com.
Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital · CNPanyu District Central Hospital · CNSixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital TJGC-2022015Guangzhou Municipal Science and Technology Project 2060206
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This randomized controlled trial aimed to determine whether lung ultrasound-guided fluid resuscitation improves the clinical outcomes of neonates with septic shock. Seventy-two patients were randomly assigned to undergo treatment with lung ultrasound-guided fluid resuscitation (LUGFR), or with usual fluid resuscitation (Control) in the first 6 h since the start of the sepsis treatment. The primary study outcome was 14-day mortality after randomization. Fourteen-day mortalities in the two groups were not significantly different (LUGFR group, 13.89%; control group, 16.67%; p = 0.76; hazard ratio 0.81 [95% CI 0.27-2.50]). The LUGFR group experienced shorter length of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stays (21 vs. 26 days, p = 0.04) and hospital stays (32 vs. 39 days, p = 0.01), and less fluid was used in the first 6 h (77 vs. 106 mL/kg, p = 0.02). Further, our study found that ultrasound-guided fluid resuscitation can significantly reduce the incidence of acute kidney injury (25% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.05) and intracranial hemorrhage (grades I-II) within 72 h (13.9% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.03). However, no significant difference was found in the resolution of shock within 1 h or 6 h, use of mechanical ventilation or vasopressor support, time to achieve lactate level < 2 mmol/L, and the number of participants developing hepatomegaly in the first 6 h.

conclusionLung ultrasound is a noninvasive and convenient tool for predicting fluid overload in neonatal septic shock. Fluid resuscitation guided by lung ultrasound can shorten the length of hospital and NICU stays, reduce the amount of fluid used in the first 6 h, and reduce the risk of acute kidney injury and intracranial hemorrhage.

trial registrationRegistered in Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital: 2021-IIT-156-EK, date of registration: November 13, 2021. And ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06144463 (retrospectively registered). WHAT IS KNOWN: • Excessive fluid resuscitation in neonates with septic shock had worse outcomes. WHAT IS NEW: • Lung ultrasound should be routinely used to guide fluid resuscitation in neonatal septic shock.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryShock, SepticFluid TherapyHumansInfant, NewbornIntracranial HemorrhagesLungResuscitationUltrasonography, InterventionalFluid resuscitationLung ultrasoundMortalityNeonateSeptic shock

Identifiers

PMID38095714
OpenAlexW4389741778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.