liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Consistency of data reporting in fluid responsiveness studies in the critically ill setting: the CODEFIRE consensus from the Cardiovascular Dynamic section of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine
IRCCS Human Res Hosp, Italy; Human Univ, Italy.
Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Division of Clinical Chemistry and Pharmacology. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Anaesthetics, Operations and Specialty Surgery Center, ANOPIVA US.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2888-4111
San Martino Hosp, Italy.
IRCCS Human Res Hosp, Italy.
Show others and affiliations
2024 (English)In: Intensive Care Medicine, ISSN 0342-4642, E-ISSN 1432-1238, Vol. 50, no 4, p. 548-560Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

PurposeTo provide consensus recommendations regarding hemodynamic data reporting in studies investigating fluid responsiveness and fluid challenge (FC) use in the intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsThe Executive Committee of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) commissioned and supervised the project. A panel of 18 international experts and a methodologist identified main domains and items from a systematic literature, plus 2 ancillary domains. A three-step Delphi process based on an iterative approach was used to obtain the final consensus. In the Delphi 1 and 2, the items were selected with strong (>= 80% of votes) or week agreement (70-80% of votes), while the Delphi 3 generated recommended (>= 90% of votes) or suggested (80-90% of votes) items (RI and SI, respectively).ResultsWe identified 5 main domains initially including 117 items and the consensus finally resulted in 52 recommendations or suggestions: 18 RIs and 2 SIs statements were obtained for the domain "ICU admission", 11 RIs and 1 SI for the domain "mechanical ventilation", 5 RIs for the domain "reason for giving a FC", 8 RIs for the domain pre- and post-FC "hemodynamic data", and 7 RIs for the domain "pre-FC infused drugs". We had no consensus on the use of echocardiography, strong agreement regarding the volume (4 ml/kg) and the reference variable (cardiac output), while weak on administration rate (within 10 min) of FC in this setting.ConclusionThis consensus found 5 main domains and provided 52 recommendations for data reporting in studies investigating fluid responsiveness in ICU patients.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SPRINGER , 2024. Vol. 50, no 4, p. 548-560
Keywords [en]
Fluid therapy; Fluid challenge; Fluid responsiveness; Hemodynamic monitoring; ESICM consensus
National Category
Peace and Conflict Studies Other Social Sciences not elsewhere specified
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-201823DOI: 10.1007/s00134-024-07344-4ISI: 001184375200002PubMedID: 38483559Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85187897166OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-201823DiVA, id: diva2:1846790
Available from: 2024-03-25 Created: 2024-03-25 Last updated: 2025-02-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Chew, Michelle S

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Chew, Michelle S
By organisation
Division of Clinical Chemistry and PharmacologyFaculty of Medicine and Health SciencesANOPIVA US
In the same journal
Intensive Care Medicine
Peace and Conflict StudiesOther Social Sciences not elsewhere specified

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 54 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf