Trial reportPloS one2026
Physicochemical effects of bicarbonate-buffered solution versus compound sodium lactate during major abdominal surgery: A randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBicarbonate-buffered crystalloids avoid exogenous lactate and have physicochemical properties distinct from compound sodium lactate (CSL), but direct comparative evidence during major abdominal surgery remains limited.
methodsThis single-center, open-label, randomized non-inferiority trial enrolled high-risk adults undergoing elective major abdominal surgery. Participants received bicarbonate-buffered solution or CSL as the allocated intraoperative crystalloid. The primary estimand was the arithmetic mean difference in standard base excess (SBE) at skin closure (bicarbonate-buffered solution minus CSL). The non-inferiority margin was -1.5 mEq/L. The trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619001228178).
resultsFifty participants were randomized (25 per group) and received their allocated intervention. End-of-surgery arterial blood gas data were missing for two CSL participants. In the intention-to-treat analysis using multiple imputation, the estimated mean difference in end-of-surgery SBE was -0.42 mEq/L (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.92 to 1.09 mEq/L). The complete-case per-protocol estimate was -0.48 mEq/L (95% CI, -2.02 to 1.06 mEq/L). In both analyses, the lower CI bound was below the prespecified non-inferiority margin; non-inferiority was not established. Secondary outcomes were exploratory; observed end-of-surgery lactate was lower with bicarbonate-buffered solution (median 0.9 vs 1.2 mmol/L; unadjusted P = 0.031), without a corresponding difference in SBE or pH.
conclusionsIn this small trial of hemodynamically stable adults undergoing elective major abdominal surgery, the primary non-inferiority result was inconclusive. The data did not establish interchangeability, equivalence, superiority, or inferiority of the two fluids. As the trial was powered for a physiologic endpoint, no comparative inference can be made about organ dysfunction, postoperative complications, recovery, or mortality. Larger trials with standardized co-interventions and patient-important outcomes are required before routine substitution for CSL can be recommended.
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.