↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Hypertonic salt solution for peri‐operative fluid management

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

4 X users
2 Facebook pages
1 Wikipedia page


14 Dimensions

Readers on

146 Mendeley
Hypertonic salt solution for peri‐operative fluid management
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005576.pub3
Pubmed ID

Brad Shrum, Brian Church, Eric McArthur, Karen EA Burns, Tammy Znajda, Vivian McAlister


Fluid excess may place people undergoing surgery at risk for various complications. Hypertonic salt solution (HS) maintains intravascular volume with less intravenous fluid than isotonic salt (IS) solutions, but may increase serum sodium. This review was published in 2010 and updated in 2016. To determine the benefits and harms of HS versus IS solutions administered for fluid resuscitation to people undergoing surgery. In this updated review we have searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 4, 2016); MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2016); EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2016); LILACS (January 1982 to April 2016) and CINAHL (January 1982 to April 2016) without language restrictions. We conducted the original search on April 30th, 2007, and reran it on April 8th, 2016. We have included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing HS to IS in people undergoing surgery, irrespective of blinding, language, and publication status. Two independent review authors read studies that met our selection criteria. We collected study information and data using a data collection sheet with predefined parameters. We have assessed the impact of HS administration on mortality, organ failure, fluid balance, serum sodium, serum osmolarity, diuresis and physiologic measures of cardiovascular function. We have pooled the data using the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes. We evaluated heterogeneity between studies by I² percentage. We consider studies with an I² of 0% to 30% to have no or little heterogeneity, 30% to 60% as having moderate heterogeneity, and more than 60% as having high heterogeneity. In studies with low heterogeneity we have used a fixed-effect model, and a random-effects model for studies with moderate to high heterogeneity. We have included 18 studies with 1087 participants of whom 545 received HS compared to 542 who received IS. All participants were over 18 years of age and all trials excluded high-risk patients (ASA IV). All trials assessed haematological parameters peri-operatively and up to three days post-operatively.There were three (< 1%) deaths reported in the IS group and four (< 1%) in the HS group, as assessed at 90 days in one study. There were no reports of serious adverse events. Most participants were in a positive fluid balance postoperatively (4.4 L IS and 2.5 L HS), with the excess significantly less in HS participants (MD -1.92 L, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.61 to -1.22 L; P < 0.00001). IS participants received a mean volume of 2.4 L and HS participants received 1.49 L, significantly less fluid than IS-treated participants (MD -0.91 L, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.59 L; P < 0.00001). The maximum average serum sodium ranged between 138.5 and 159 in HS groups compared to between 136 and 143 meq/L in the IS groups. The maximum serum sodium was significantly higher in HS participants (MD 7.73, 95% CI 5.84 to 9.62; P < 0.00001), although the level remained within normal limits (136 to 146 meq/L).A high degree of heterogeneity appeared to be related to considerable differences in the dose of HS between studies. The quality of the evidence for the outcomes reported ranged from high to very low. The risk of bias for many of the studies could not be determined for performance and detection bias, criteria that we assess as likely to impact the study outcomes. HS reduces the volume of intravenous fluid required to maintain people undergoing surgery but transiently increases serum sodium. It is not known if HS affects survival and morbidity, but this should be examined in randomized controlled trials that are designed and powered to test these outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 145 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 25 17%
Student > Master 20 14%
Other 11 8%
Researcher 8 5%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 31 21%
Unknown 44 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Psychology 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 50 34%
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 05 January 2023.
All research outputs
of 25,378,799 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 13,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 349,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 263 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,799 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 349,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 263 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.