ArticlePediatric research2026
Epinephrine versus saline volume expansion in neonatal resuscitation: a blinded randomized piglet study.
Article in Pediatric research, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare a normal saline bolus versus epinephrine during resuscitation on mortality and brain injury assessed by magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in newborn piglets.
methodsThirty-two newborn piglets were subjected to hypoxic cardiac arrest and randomized to resuscitation with epinephrine (0.01 mg/kg, n = 16) or saline bolus (0.9%, 10 mL/kg, n = 16). A sham group received no intravenous treatment (n = 8). Brain MRS and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed 18 h after resuscitation. The primary outcome was a composite of death or severe brain damage determined by MRS. Secondary outcomes were mortality, time to return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and MRI/MRS measures of brain injury.
resultsThere was no difference between piglets resuscitated with saline bolus vs. epinephrine in the primary outcome (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.56, 1.58). The two groups were also similar with regards to mortality, time to ROSC, and MRS/MRI-outcomes. Sham piglets had a higher mortality (RR: 1.50, 95% CI: 0.88, 2.55) than intravenous treatment groups, although not statistically significant.
conclusionSaline bolus during resuscitation was as effective as epinephrine in preventing death and brain injury, as determined by MRS. Saline bolus may be a relevant alternative to epinephrine during neonatal resuscitation. IMPACT: Saline bolus is as effective as epinephrine in achieving return of spontaneous circulation in newborn piglets with hypoxic cardiac arrest. Saline bolus and epinephrine result in similar brain outcomes measured by magnetic resonance spectroscopy at 18 h. Saline bolus and epinephrine achieve similar time to return of spontaneous circulation and 18-h survival. This study adds to the limited evidence regarding the effect of saline volume expansion during neonatal resuscitation and underlines the need for clinical trials.
Identifiers
42141204What 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.