Observational studyCritical care science2024
Changes in central venous pressure during a fluid challenge have limited value for guiding fluid therapy.
Observational study in Critical care science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate whether changes in central venous pressure during fluid expansion and baseline cyclic respiratory variation in the central venous pressure amplitude (RespCVP) curve could be used to discriminate between fluid responders and nonresponders.
methodsThis prospective observational study included critically ill adult patients who underwent fluid expansion in the form of a fluid bolus or fluid challenge with crystalloids. All patients were under mechanical ventilation and adequately sedated. We determined the central venous pressure at baseline (CVPT0) and the changes at 5 (ΔCVPT5), 10 (ΔCVPT10) and 15 (ΔCVPT15) minutes during fluid infusion. We also measured the RespCVP at baseline. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a cardiac index increase of ≥ 15%.
resultsThe study included 30 patients (11 responders and 19 nonresponders). The CVPT0 and the changes after a fluid challenge at all three time points did not adequately predict fluid responsiveness, as determined by their area under the curve values (CVPT0: 0.70, (95%CI: 0.49 - 0.90; ΔCVPT5: 0.78, (95%CI: 0.57 - 0.99; ΔCVPT10: 0.63, (95%CI: 0.39 - 0.88; ΔCVPT15: 0.68, ((95%CI: 0.45 - 0.92). The RespCVP at baseline also had a poor performance (area under the curve: 0.70; 95%CI: 0.50 - 0.91).
conclusionChanges in central venous pressure have limited value in predicting fluid responsiveness.
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.