Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 474

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of Three Fluid Solutions for Resuscitation in Dengue Shock Syndrome

Open access
Wills, Bridget A., Dung, Nguyen M., Loan, Ha T., Tam, Dong T.H., Thuy, Tran T.N., Minh, Le T.T., Diet, Tran V., Hao, Nguyen T., Chau, Nguyen V., Stepniewska, Kasia, White, Nicholas J., Farrar, Jeremy J.·2005·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dengue shock syndrome is characterized by severe vascular leakage and disordered hemostasis and progresses to death in 1 to 5 percent of cases. Although volume replacement is recognized as the critical therapeutic intervention, World Health Organization management guidelines remain empirical rather than evidence-based. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, randomized comparison of three fluids for initial resuscitation of Vietnamese children with dengue shock syndrome. We randomly assigned 383 children with moderately severe shock to receive Ringer's lactate, 6 percent dextran 70 (a colloid), or 6 percent hydroxyethyl starch (a colloid) and 129 children with severe shock to receive one of the colloids. The primary outcome measure was requirement for rescue colloid at any time after administration of the study fluid. RESULTS: Only one patient died (<0.2 percent mortality). The primary outcome measure--requirement for rescue colloid--was similar for the different fluids in the two severity groups. The relative risk of requirement for rescue colloid was 1.08 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.47; P=0.65) among children with moderate shock who received Ringer's lactate as compared with either of the colloid solutions, 1.13 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.74; P=0.59) among children who received dextran as compared with starch in the group with severe shock, and 0.88 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.66 to 1.17; P=0.38) among children who received dextran as compared with starch in the combined analysis. Although treatment with Ringer's lactate resulted in less rapid improvement in the hematocrit and a marginally longer time to initial recovery than did treatment with either of the colloid solutions, there were no differences in all other measures of treatment response. Only minor differences in efficacy were detected between the two colloids, but significantly more recipients of dextran than of starch had adverse reactions. Bleeding manifestations, coagulation derangements, and severity of fluid overload were similar for all fluid-treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Initial resuscitation with Ringer's lactate is indicated for children with moderately severe dengue shock syndrome. Dextran 70 and 6 percent hydroxyethyl starch perform similarly in children with severe shock, but given the adverse reactions associated with the use of dextran, starch may be preferable for this group.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa044057

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. 10.1016/S0022-3476(66)80249-4 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)12483-7 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1073/pnas.91.7.2395 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Schierhout G, 1998, BMJ, 316, 961, 10.1136/bmj.316.7136.961 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1097/00003246-199901000-00053 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Alderson P, 2000, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2, CD000567
  7. Haupt MT, 1992, Crit Care Clin, 8, 341, 10.1016/S0749-0704(18)30254-9 · doi:10.1016/s0749-0704(18)30254-9
  8. Griffel MI, 1992, Crit Care Clin, 8, 235, 10.1016/S0749-0704(18)30249-5 · doi:10.1016/s0749-0704(18)30249-5
  9. 10.1086/520435 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1086/318479 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1086/422754 · DOI
  12. 10.1056/NEJMoa040232 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Starling EH, 1896, J Physiol, 19, 312, 10.1113/jphysiol.1896.sp000596 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Michel CC, 1999, Physiol Rev, 79, 703, 10.1152/physrev.1999.79.3.703 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1987.tb08047.x · doi:10.1111/j.1748-1716.1987.tb08047.x
  16. Schneeberger EE, 1990, Am J Physiol, 258, L89
  17. Huxley VH, 1991, Am J Physiol, 260, H1645
  18. Vink H, 2000, Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 278, H285, 10.1152/ajpheart.2000.278.1.H285 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 474

Metadata

Authors
Wills, B. A., Dung, N. M., Loan, H. T., Tam, D. T. H., Thuy, T. T. N., Minh, L. T. T., Diet, T. V., Hao, N. T., Chau, N. V., Stepniewska, K., White, N. J., & Farrar, J. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2005-09
Volume
353
Issue
9
Pages
877-889
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2132269368
Cited by
474
References
0
FWCI
21.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Three Fluid Solutions for Resuscitation in Dengue Shock Syndrome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa044057
The paper
Wills, B. A., Dung, N. M., Loan, H. T., Tam, D. T. H., Thuy, T. T. N., Minh, L. T. T., Diet, T. V., Hao, N. T., Chau, N. V., Stepniewska, K., White, N. J., & Farrar, J. J. (2005). Comparison of Three Fluid Solutions for Resuscitation in Dengue Shock Syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa044057

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.