Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42642563›Full record

ArticlePediatric research2026

Mini fluid challenge versus passive leg raising test for predicting fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing children.

Carlos Ocaña-Alcober, Ignacio Oulego-Erroz, Daniel Palanca-Arias, Gloria López-Blanco, Almudena Alonso-Ojembarrena, Juan José Menéndez-Suso, José Luis Vázquez-Martínez

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Carlos Ocaña-Alcober *Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, León, Spain.
Ignacio Oulego-Erroz *Pediatric Cardiology and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, León, Spain. ignacio.oulego@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9653-954X
Daniel Palanca-AriasPediatric Cardiology and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain.
Gloria López-BlancoPediatric Cardiology and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, León, Spain.
Almudena Alonso-OjembarrenaNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Puerta del Mar, Cádiz, Spain.
Juan José Menéndez-SusoPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Infantil Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain.
José Luis Vázquez-MartínezWorking group on Bedside Ultrasound. Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine (SECIP), Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFluid responsiveness assessment is recommended in acutely ill patients to avoid fluid overload. However, pediatric evidence on which bedside tests to use and how to apply them remains limited, particularly in spontaneously breathing children. We compared passive leg raising (PLR) and the mini-fluid challenge (mini-FC), hypothesizing that mini-FC would show greater diagnostic performance.

methodsPrespecified secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort of spontaneously breathing children requiring fluid resuscitation. Patients underwent standardized PLR followed by a fluid challenge (FC) embedding a mini-FC (4 mL/kg). Stroke volume was measured by transthoracic echocardiography. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a stroke volume increase >15% after 20 mL/kg. Diagnostic performance was assessed using ROC analysis, high-specificity thresholds, gray-zone analysis, and age-predictor interaction models.

resultsEighty-seven children were analyzed; 52.9% were fluid responders. Mini-FC showed good discrimination (AUC 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.92) whereas the PLR showed acceptable discrimination (AUC 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.87; DeLong p = 0.26). Youden-derived thresholds were 8% for mini-FC and 14.5% for PLR, closely approximating clinically driven high-specificity thresholds of 8% and 13.9%, respectively. At the clinically driven thresholds, mini-FC showed higher sensitivity than PLR (71.7% vs. 60.9%). Mini-FC also classified more patients outside the gray zone (63.2% vs. 50.6%) with fewer misclassifications. Unlike PLR, mini-FC performance remained stable across age.

conclusionMini-FC showed clinically useful diagnostic performance and appeared to provide more consistent classification across age groups than PLR in this cohort. IMPACT STATEMENT: In spontaneously breathing children, both passive leg raising and mini-fluid challenge predict fluid responsiveness, but the mini-fluid challenge provides greater diagnostic certainty and more consistent performance across ages. Evidence guiding fluid responsiveness assessment in pediatrics is scarce, and this study provides one of the first direct, head-to-head clinical comparisons of two bedside dynamic tests under identical conditions. By offering a simple, weight-indexed preload test, the mini-fluid challenge may help guide early fluid resuscitation while limiting the risks associated with unnecessary fluid overload.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.