Indices de réponse au remplissage vasculaire lors de la prise en charge d’un choc septique : utilisation par les médecins urgentistes

Melot, J.; Sebbane, Mustapha; Dingemans, G.; Claret, P.-G.; Arbouet, E.; Barkat, B.; Jamet, P.; Kovalevsky, P. I.; Louart, Benjamin; Moreau, Alain; Mourou, H.; Ortega, Loréna; Randriamamonjy, N.; Vandercamere, Thomas; Eledjam, J.J.; Coussaye, J.-E. de La; Péray, Pascale; Lefrant, JY; Muller, Laurent; Groupe, AzuRéa

doi:10.1016/j.annfar.2012.03.014

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in line with a recent French survey that demonstrated that ED clinicians prefer to use the less invasive and less time-consuming indicators of fluid responsiveness [48]. In our review bioreactance was employed in 3 studies [35, 36, 41], ultrasound derived caval index in 3 studies [37–39] and plethysmography in one study [40].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

The haemodynamic dilemma in emergency care: Is fluid responsiveness the answer? A systematic review

Elwan

Roshdy

Elsharkawy

et al. 2017

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundFluid therapy is a common and crucial treatment in the emergency department (ED). While fluid responsiveness seems to be a promising method to titrate fluid therapy, the evidence for its value in ED is unclear. We aim to synthesise the existing literature investigating fluid responsiveness in ED.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane library were searched for relevant peer-reviewed studies published from 1946 to present.ResultsA total of 249 publications were retrieved of which 22 studies underwent full-text review and eight relevant studies were identified. Only 3 studies addressed clinical outcomes - including 2 randomised controlled trials and one feasibility study. Five articles evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of fluid responsiveness techniques in ED. Due to marked heterogeneity, it was not possible to combine results in a meta-analysis.ConclusionHigh quality, adequately powered outcome studies are still lacking, so the place of fluid responsiveness in ED remains undefined. Future studies should have standardisation of patient groups, the target response and the underpinning theoretic concept of fluid responsiveness. The value of a fluid responsiveness based fluid resuscitation protocol needs to be established in a clinical trial.

show abstract