The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy
Open accessAbstract
The clinical determination of the intravascular volume can be extremely difficult in critically ill and injured patients as well as those undergoing major surgery. This is problematic because fluid loading is considered the first step in the resuscitation of hemodynamically unstable patients. Yet, multiple studies have demonstrated that only approximately 50% of hemodynamically unstable patients in the intensive care unit and operating room respond to a fluid challenge. Whereas under-resuscitation results in inadequate organ perfusion, accumulating data suggest that over-resuscitation increases the morbidity and mortality of critically ill patients. Cardiac filling pressures, including the central venous pressure and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, have been traditionally used to guide fluid management. However, studies performed during the past 30 years have demonstrated that cardiac filling pressures are unable to predict fluid responsiveness. During the past decade, a number of dynamic tests of volume responsiveness have been reported. These tests dynamically monitor the change in stroke volume after a maneuver that increases or decreases venous return (preload) and challenges the patients' Frank-Starling curve. These dynamic tests use the change in stroke volume during mechanical ventilation or after a passive leg raising maneuver to assess fluid responsiveness. The stroke volume is measured continuously and in real-time by minimally invasive or noninvasive technologies, including Doppler methods, pulse contour analysis, and bioreactance.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock
Rivers, E., Nguyen, B., Havstad, S., Ressler, J., Muzzin, A., Knoblich, B., Peterson, E., & Tomlanovich, M. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa010307 · Cited by 10,743
Cited by
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock
Dellinger, R. P., Levy, M. M., Rhodes, A., Annane, D., Gerlach, H., Opal, S. M., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Douglas, I. S., Jaeschke, R., et al. (2013) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31827e83af · Cited by 9,694
Cecconi, M., Evans, L., Levy, M., & Rhodes, A. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30696-2 · Cited by 2,254
Cecconi, M., De Backer, D., Antonelli, M., Beale, R., Bakker, J., Hofer, C., Jaeschke, R., Mebazaa, A., Pinsky, M. R., Teboul, J. L., et al. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3525-z · Cited by 1,767
Self-citationAcute kidney injury: an increasing global concern
Lameire, N. H., Bagga, A., Cruz, D., De Maeseneer, J., Endre, Z., Kellum, J. A., Liu, K. D., Mehta, R. L., Pannu, N., Van Biesen, W., et al. (2013) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60647-9 · Cited by 1,001
Marik, P. E., & Cavallazzi, R. (2013) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31828a25fd · Cited by 866
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Marik, P. E., Monnet, X., & Teboul, J.-L.
- Venue
- Annals of Intensive Care
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-03-21
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-1
- ISSN
- 2110-5820 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2044787274
- Cited by
- 686
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 51.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/2110-5820-1-1
- The paper
- Marik, P. E., Monnet, X., & Teboul, J.-L. (2011). Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. Annals of Intensive Care. https://doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-1-1
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.