The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Lactated Ringer???s Solution and 0.9% NaCl During Renal Transplantation
Abstract
In Brief Normal saline (NS; 0.9% NaCl) is administered during kidney transplantation to avoid the risk of hyperkalemia associated with potassium-containing fluids. Recent evidence suggests that NS may be associated with adverse effects that are not seen with balanced-salt fluids, e.g., lactated Ringer’s solution (LR). We hypothesized that NS is detrimental to renal function in kidney transplant recipients. Adults undergoing kidney transplantation were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of NS versus LR for intraoperative IV fluid therapy. The primary outcome measure was creatinine concentration on postoperative Day 3. The study was terminated for safety reasons after interim analysis of data from 51 patients. Forty-eight patients underwent living donor kidney transplants, and three patients underwent cadaveric donor transplants. Twenty-six patients received NS, and 25 patients received LR. There was no difference between groups in the primary outcome measure. Five (19%) patients in the NS group versus zero (0%) patients in the LR group had potassium concentrations >6 mEq/L and were treated for hyperkalemia (P = 0.05). Eight (31%) patients in the NS group versus zero (0%) patients in the LR group were treated for metabolic acidosis (P = 0.004). NS did not adversely affect renal function. LR was associated with less hyperkalemia and acidosis compared with NS. LR may be a safe choice for IV fluid therapy in patients undergoing kidney transplantation. IMPLICATIONS: Lactated Ringer’s solution (LR) caused less hyperkalemia and acidemia than 0.9% NaCl when administered for intraoperative fluid therapy during kidney transplantation. Therefore, LR may be a safe and superior choice for IV fluid replacement therapy during kidney transplant surgery.
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
Cited by
Chowdhury, A. H., Cox, E. F., Francis, S. T., & Lobo, D. N. (2012) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318256be72 · Cited by 764
Acute kidney injury-epidemiology, outcomes and economics
Rewa, O., & Bagshaw, S. M. (2014) · Nature Reviews Nephrology · doi:10.1038/nrneph.2013.282 · Cited by 734
Shaw, A. D., Bagshaw, S. M., Goldstein, S. L., Scherer, L. A., Duan, M., Schermer, C. R., & Kellum, J. A. (2012) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31825074f5 · Cited by 668
Metadata
- Authors
- O???Malley, C. M. N., Frumento, R. J., Hardy, M. A., Benvenisty, A. I., Brentjens, T. E., Mercer, J. S., & Bennett-Guerrero, E.
- Venue
- Anesthesia & Analgesia
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1518-1524
- ISSN
- 0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2020449386
- Cited by
- 410
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: A Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Lactated Ringer???s Solution and 0.9% NaCl During Renal Transplantation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1213/01.ane.0000150939.28904.81
- The paper
- O???Malley, C. M. N., Frumento, R. J., Hardy, M. A., Benvenisty, A. I., Brentjens, T. E., Mercer, J. S., & Bennett-Guerrero, E. (2005). A Randomized, Double-Blind Comparison of Lactated Ringer???s Solution and 0.9% NaCl During Renal Transplantation. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ane.0000150939.28904.81
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.