ArticleCureus2023
A Nationwide Analysis of Fluid Resuscitation Outcomes in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fluid Therapy in Acute Pancreatitis-Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Association between estimated plasma volume status and the risk of 30-day mortality in patients with severe acute pancreatitis: a retrospective study based on the MIMIC-IV database.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Advances in the Management of Fluid Resuscitation in Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A Nationwide Analysis of Fluid Resuscitation Outcomes in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis.Cureus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditionally, fluid resuscitation has been the foundation of effective acute pancreatitis (AP) treatment. Experts advocate for aggressive intravenous fluid (IVF) resuscitation, especially within the first 24 hours. Research suggests limited efficacy of this approach; in fact, some studies show there may be a risk of increased complications. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes of aggressive IVF resuscitation in patients with AP.
methodsWe queried the TriNetX Research Network (Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States) for patients admitted between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, with a diagnosis of AP and who had received IVF on admission for at least 24 hours. We compared two cohorts; cohort 1 consisted of patients receiving aggressive IVF resuscitation (>3 ml/kg/hr), and cohort 2 was comprised of patients receiving non-aggressive (≤1.5 ml/kg/hr) IVF resuscitation. We compared mortality during index hospitalization, hospital length of stay (HLS), mechanical ventilation rates, acute kidney injury (AKI), and severe sepsis between the cohorts with propensity scoring matched (PSM) pairs of patients. A sub-analysis of patients with severe AP was performed.
resultsAfter comparing the two well-matched PSM cohorts (3,680/3,680), we found no significant differences in mortality, HLS, mechanical ventilation rates, AKI, or severe sepsis. We found similar results after conducting the sub-analysis of patients with severe pancreatitis.
conclusionsWe found no significant differences in mortality and HLS when comparing rates of IVF resuscitation.
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.