ReviewJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025
Assessing fluid responsiveness by using functional hemodynamic tests in critically ill patients: a narrative review and a profile-based clinical guide.
Review in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated haemodynamic monitoring of fluid responsiveness and fluid tolerance in critical care: from physiology to bedside applications.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Review
- PEEP and alveolar recruitment after 60 years of acute respiratory distress syndrome.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Pulse pressure versus continuous flow monitoring for fluid responsiveness prediction during passive leg raising: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Clinical subphenotypes in septic patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation: validation and parsimonious classifier model development.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Personalised fluid therapy in septic shock.Annals of intensive care · 2026Review
- Personalizezed Hemodynamic Optimization Using Stroke Volume, Pulse Pressure Variation, and Continuous Cardiac Index in Major Liver Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fluids are given with the purpose of increasing cardiac output (CO), but approximately only 50% of critically ill patients are fluid responders. Since the effect of a fluid bolus is time-sensitive, it diminuish within few hours, following the initial fluid resuscitation. Several functional hemodynamic tests (FHTs), consisting of maneuvers affecting heart-lung interactions, have been conceived to discriminate fluid responders from non-responders. Three main variables affect the reliability of FHTs in predicting fluid responsiveness: (1) tidal volume; (2) spontaneous breathing activity; (3) cardiac arrythmias. Most FTHs have been validated in sedated or even paralyzed ICU patients, since, historically, controlled mechanical ventilation with high tidal volumes was the preferred mode of ventilatory support. The transition to contemporary methods of invasive mechanical ventilation with spontaneous breathing activity impacts heart-lung interactions by modifying intrathoracic pressure, tidal volumes and transvascular pressure in lung capillaries. These alterations and the heterogeneity in respiratory mechanics (that is present both in healthy and injured lungs) subsequently influence venous return and cardiac output. Cardiac arrythmias are frequently present in critically ill patients, especially atrial fibrillation, and intuitively impact on FHTs. This is due to the random CO fluctuations. Finally, the presence of continuous CO monitoring in ICU patients is not standard and the assessment of fluid responsiveness with surrogate methods is clinically useful, but also challenging. In this review we provide an algorithm for the use of FHTs in different subgroups of ICU patients, according to ventilatory setting, cardiac rhythm and the availability of continuous hemodynamic monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39831948What 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.