A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Fluid resuscitation in human sepsis: Time to rewrite history? | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • Fluid resuscitation is traditionally the go-to treatment for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, rooted in its historical use in various shock situations and misconceptions about sepsis.
  • Recent studies indicate that using less fluid or none at all might lead to better outcomes, raising questions about the effectiveness and safety of standard fluid therapy for sepsis.
  • The article suggests a need for further research, particularly focusing on better animal models and studies that assess minimal or no fluid strategies during sepsis treatment.

Article Abstract

Fluid resuscitation continues to be recommended as the first-line resuscitative therapy for all patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. The current acceptance of the therapy is based in part on long history and familiarity with its use in the resuscitation of other forms of shock, as well as on an incomplete and incorrect understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis. Recently, the safety of intravenous fluids in patients with sepsis has been called into question with both prospective and observational data suggesting improved outcomes with less fluid or no fluid. The current evidence for the continued use of fluid resuscitation for sepsis remains contentious with no prospective evidence demonstrating benefit to fluid resuscitation as a therapy in isolation. This article reviews the historical and physiological rationale for the introduction of fluid resuscitation as treatment for sepsis and highlights a number of significant concerns based on current experimental and clinical evidence. The research agenda should focus on the development of hyperdynamic animal sepsis models which more closely mimic human sepsis and on experimental and clinical studies designed to evaluate minimal or no fluid strategies in the resuscitation phase of sepsis.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5209309PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-016-0231-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fluid resuscitation
20
sepsis
9
fluid
8
human sepsis
8
experimental clinical
8
resuscitation
6
resuscitation human
4
sepsis time
4
time rewrite
4
rewrite history?
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!