Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39709493›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2024

Impact on fluid balance of an optimized restrictive strategy targeting non-resuscitative fluids in intensive care patients with septic shock: a single-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled, pilot study.

Nicolas Boulet, Jean-Pierre Quenot, Chris Serrand, Nadiejda Antier, Sylvain Garnier, Aurèle Buzancais, Laurent Muller, Claire Roger, Jean-Yves Lefrant, Saber Davide Barbar

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04947904 (Impact on Fluid Balance of an Optimised Restrictive Strategy Targeting Non-Resuscitative Fluids in Intensive Care Patients Hospitalised for Septic Shock), which is not on this 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.

NCT04947904 nacompletednot on this map

Impact on Fluid Balance of an Optimised Restrictive Strategy Targeting Non-Resuscitative Fluids in Intensive Care Patients Hospitalised for Septic Shock: an Open-label, Multi-Centre, Randomised, Controlled Pilot Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de NīmesRan2021 to 2023Enrolled50ConditionsSeptic Shock, Electrolyte and Fluid Balance ConditionsArmsReduction of the patient's fluid intake during the first 7 days
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Nicolas BouletDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, UR‑UM103 IMAGINE, University of Montpellier, Nimes University Hospital, Nîmes, France.
Jean-Pierre QuenotDepartment of Intensive Care, Burgundy University Hospital, Dijon, France.
Chris SerrandDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Public Health and Innovation in Methodology, Nimes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Nadiejda AntierDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, Nimes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Sylvain GarnierDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, Nimes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Aurèle BuzancaisDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, Nimes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Laurent MullerDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, UR‑UM103 IMAGINE, University of Montpellier, Nimes University Hospital, Nîmes, France.
Claire RogerDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, UR‑UM103 IMAGINE, University of Montpellier, Nimes University Hospital, Nîmes, France.
Jean-Yves LefrantDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, UR‑UM103 IMAGINE, University of Montpellier, Nimes University Hospital, Nîmes, France.
Saber Davide BarbarDivision of Anesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Emergency Medicine, UR‑UM103 IMAGINE, University of Montpellier, Nimes University Hospital, Nîmes, France. saber.barbar@chu-nimes.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn septic shock, the classic fluid resuscitation strategy can lead to a potentially harmful positive fluid balance. This multicenter, randomized, single-blind, parallel, controlled pilot study assessed the effectiveness of a restrictive fluid strategy aiming to limit daily volume.

methodsPatients 18-85 years' old admitted to the ICU department of three French hospitals were eligible for inclusion if they had septic shock and were in the first 24 h of vasopressor infusion. Exclusion criteria were acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy, end stage chronic kidney disease, and severe malnutrition. Patients were electronically randomized 1:1 to either an optimized fluid restriction (reducing fluid intake as much as possible in terms of maintenance fluids and fluids for drug dilution during the first 7 days) or standard fluid strategy. The primary outcome was cumulative fluid balance (ml/kg) in the first 5 days. Patients and statisticians were blinded to group arm, but not clinicians.

resultsBetween September 2021 and February 2023, 1201 patients were screened and 50 included, with two in the control group withdrawing, thus 48 patients were analyzed (24 in each group). In the first 5 days, the optimized restrictive strategy and control groups received 89.7 (IQR 35; 128.9) and 114.3 (IQR 78.8; 168.5) ml/kg of fluid, respectively (mean difference: 35.9 ml/kg [0.0; 71.8], p = 0.0506). After 5 days, the median cumulative fluid balance was 6.9 (IQR - 13.7; 52.1) and 35.0 (IQR - 7.9; 40.2) ml/kg in the optimized restrictive strategy and control groups, respectively (absolute difference 13.2 [95%CI - 15.2; 41.6], p = 0.42). After 28 days, mortality and the numbers of days alive without life support were similar between groups. The main adverse events were severe hypernatremia in 1 and 2 patients in the fluid restriction strategy and control groups, respectively, and acute kidney injury KDIGO 3 in 4 and 7 patients in the fluid restriction strategy and control groups, respectively.

conclusionsIn ICU patients with septic shock, an optimized restrictive fluid strategy targeting hidden fluid intakes did not reduce the overall fluid balance at day 5. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04947904, registered on 1 July 2021.

Indexed as

Fluid TherapyShock, SepticAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFranceHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsSingle-Blind MethodWater-Electrolyte BalanceFluid balanceIntensive care unitRestrictive strategySeptic shock

Identifiers

PMID39709493
PMCPMC11663312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.