↓ Skip to main content

The great fluid debate: saline or so-called “balanced” salt solutions?

Overview of attention for article published in Italian Journal of Pediatrics, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The great fluid debate: saline or so-called “balanced” salt solutions?
Published in
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13052-015-0154-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maristella Santi, Sebastiano A. G. Lava, Pietro Camozzi, Olivier Giannini, Gregorio P. Milani, Giacomo D. Simonetti, Emilio F. Fossali, Mario G. Bianchetti, Pietro B. Faré

Abstract

Intravenous fluids are commonly prescribed in childhood. 0.9 % saline is the most-used fluid in pediatrics as resuscitation or maintenance solution. Experimental studies and observations in adults suggest that 0.9 % saline is a poor candidate for fluid resuscitation. Although anesthesiologists, intensive care specialists, perioperative physicians and nephrologists have been the most active in this debate, this issue deserves some physiopathological considerations also among pediatricians. As compared with so-called "balanced" salt crystalloids such as lactated Ringer, administration of large volumes of 0.9 % saline has been associated with following deleterious effects: tendency to hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis (called dilution acidosis); acute kidney injury with reduced urine output and salt retention; damaged vascular permeability and stiffness, increase in proinflammatory mediators; detrimental effect on coagulation with tendency to blood loss; detrimental gastrointestinal perfusion and function; possible uneasiness at the bedside resulting in unnecessary administration of more fluids. Nevertheless, there is no firm evidence that these adverse effects are clinically relevant. Intravenous fluid therapy is a medicine like insulin, chemotherapy or antibiotics. Prescribing fluids should fit the child's history and condition, consider the right dose at the right rate as well as the electrolyte levels and other laboratory variables. It is unlikely that a single type of fluid will be suitable for all pediatric patients. "Balanced" salt crystalloids, although more expensive, should be preferred for volume resuscitation, maintenance and perioperatively. Lactated Ringer appears unsuitable for patients at risk for brain edema and for those with overt or latent chloride-deficiency. Finally, in pediatrics there is a need for new fluids to be developed on the basis of a better understanding of the physiology and to be tested in well-designed trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 115 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Postgraduate 13 11%
Other 12 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 25 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 62%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 29 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#5,548,758
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#222
of 1,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,702
of 279,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,076 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,028 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.