ArticleAcute medicine & surgery
Clinical Impact of Initial Fluid Resuscitation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock.
Article in Acute medicine & surgery. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To assess the current status of initial fluid administration in patients with cardiogenic shock. Methods: Patients with cardiogenic shock registered in the Japanese Circulation Society Cardiovascular Shock Registry were analyzed to investigate real-world fluid resuscitation status upon hospital arrival. From this registry, patients with and without pulmonary congestion were investigated to identify differences in fluid administration. Additionally, the 30-day mortality rate between the groups was examined on the basis of the initial fluid volume administered. Results: A total of 586 patients with cardiogenic shock were included. Initial fluid resuscitation within 30 min after hospital arrival was administered to 568 (96.9%) patients. In multivariate logistic regression for 30-day mortality, older age, lower systolic blood pressure, and a fluid volume of 1001-2000 mL within 30 min after hospital arrival were significant predictors. The 30-day mortality rate in patients with pulmonary congestion (442 patients) was higher than that in patients without pulmonary congestion (144 patients). However, there was no difference in the 30-day mortality rate between the groups based on the initial fluid volume administered. Conclusion: Initial fluid administration in patients with cardiogenic shock is common practice. Although patients with pulmonary congestion had higher overall 30-day mortality, the volume of initial fluid administered after hospital arrival was not associated with worse 30-day mortality.
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.