ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Deleterious Effects of Liberal Fluid Therapy During Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in a Porcine Model of Prolonged Cardiac Arrest.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vasoplegia in Cardiac Surgery and Mechanical Circulatory Support: From Cardiopulmonary Bypass to Advanced Circulatory Support Devices.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Early active normothermia versus no temperature control in a porcine model of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Early Pulmonary Stress During Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and Hypervolemia: Surfactant Protein A1 and Multi-Compartment Biomarker Responses in Rats.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR), fluid therapy is often required to maintain adequate blood flow. Here, we aimed to compare the impact of 2 fluid strategies on organ edema, tissue perfusion, and systemic and cerebral hemodynamics in a porcine model of ECPR.
methodsSwine were subjected to 15 minutes of ventricular fibrillation followed by 30 minutes of ECPR. After defibrillations and return of spontaneous beating, animals were followed for 120 minutes. Swine were randomly assigned to a conservative group (n=7), in which fluid loading was limited to a maximum of 20 mL/kg per hour of Ringer's lactate, or a liberal group (n=7), in which fluid loading was allowed as long as right atrial pressure remained <18 mm Hg. In both groups, fluid loading was triggered by suction events, flow drops, and arterial hypotension defined as mean arterial pressure <65 mm Hg.
resultsExtracorporeal membrane oxygenation flow and mean arterial pressure were similar between groups. Fluid administration was higher in the liberal group (48.2±18.5 versus 19.3±4.6 mL/kg per hour,
conclusionsDuring ECPR, liberal strategy resulted in a detrimental increase in intracranial and intra-abdominal pressures. Nevertheless, conservative strategy was associated with high vasopressor load and lower lactate clearance.
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.