ArticleBMC anesthesiology2026
Trendelenburg maneuver to predict fluid responsiveness in patients under mechanical ventilation with spontaneous breathing: a prospective study.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundBoth hypovolemia and fluid overload are associated with adverse outcomes in critically ill patients, yet many methods for assessing fluid responsiveness have limitations. The Trendelenburg maneuver, which transiently increases cardiac preload through a head-down tilt and operates on the same principle as passive leg raising but is easier to perform and more comfortable, may offer a practical adjunct in light-sedated patients under mechanical ventilation with spontaneous breathing activity, a common clinical scenario.
methodsIn this single-center, prospective study, mechanically ventilated adults with spontaneous breathing and signs of tissue hypoperfusion in a surgical intensive care unit (ICU) underwent a standardized sequence of hemodynamic assessments: supine baseline (T0), reverse Trendelenburg + 10° (T1), Trendelenburg − 13° (T2), return to supine before fluid loading (F0), and reassessment after a 4 mL/kg infusion of 5% albumin over 15 min (FL). Hemodynamics (cardiac index [CI], stroke volume variation [SVV], pulse pressure variation [PPV], central venous pressure [CVP]) were measured with FloTrac™/HemoSphere™. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a ≥ 10% increase in CI from F0 to FL. The diagnostic performance of Trendelenburg-induced hemodynamic changes (Δ values, T2–T1) and baseline variables was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and gray-zone analysis was performed to quantify diagnostic uncertainty.
resultsThirty-eight patients were included; 21 (55%) were classified as fluid responders. A ΔCI > 0.15 L/min/m2 yielded an AUROC of 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.64–0.93), with 52.4% sensitivity and 82.4% specificity; however, more than 80% of patients fell within the gray zone. A Δ%CI > 6% showed similar performance, while ΔSVV and ΔPPV demonstrated lower but moderate accuracy. In sensitivity analyses, diagnostic performance decreased when fluid responsiveness was redefined as a ≥ 15% increase in CI, and was slightly lower among patients receiving norepinephrine < 0.1 µg/kg/min.
conclusionsThe Trendelenburg maneuver was feasible and safe but showed limited and inconsistent diagnostic performance for predicting fluid responsiveness. With more than 80% of patients falling within wide gray zones, the test is inconclusive for most bedside decisions and should not be used as a stand-alone guide.
trial registrationThai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR20230704005) registered 4 July 2023.
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.