ArticleJournal of inflammation research2026
Rethinking Fluid Resuscitation in Septic Shock: A Phase-Adapted, Endothelium-Sparing Approach to Mitigate Capillary Leak.
Article in Journal of inflammation research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis-induced endothelial dysfunction and the resultant capillary leak syndrome are defining features of septic shock, posing a profound challenge to conventional fluid resuscitation strategies. The long-standing debate over crystalloid versus colloid administration is evolving beyond a simple dichotomy toward a more nuanced, physiologically informed approach. This review critically examines the pathophysiological cascade driving vascular hyperpermeability in sepsis-from endothelial glycocalyx degradation and inflammatory cytokine storms to oxidative stress and nitric oxide dysregulation. We trace the evolution of resuscitation paradigms from early goal-directed therapy to modern conservative approaches, highlighting the limitations of crystalloid-dominant protocols, including intravascular volume depletion despite a positive fluid balance and iatrogenic organ injury. Drawing on evidence from landmark clinical trials (eg, ALBIOS, CRISTAL, SMART) and a pharmacological reappraisal of fluid properties, we argue that a one-size-fits-all strategy is obsolete. Instead, this narrative review synthesizes recent trial evidence and pathophysiological insights to propose the Phase-Adapted, Endothelium-Sparing (PAES) resuscitation strategy, a novel framework that tailors fluid type and volume to the distinct temporal phases of septic shock: Rescue, Optimization, Stabilization, and De-escalation. This model advocates for initial resuscitation with balanced crystalloids, followed by the judicious integration of albumin in specific, high-risk patient subgroups to leverage its unique oncotic and pleiotropic, endothelium-stabilizing effects. We further outline how dynamic hemodynamic monitoring, point-of-care ultrasound, and emerging biomarkers of endothelial injury (eg, syndecan-1, angiopoietin-2) can guide the real-time implementation of this personalized strategy. The PAES framework aims to uncouple macrohemodynamic stabilization from microcirculatory injury, offering a pragmatic pathway to optimize perfusion, mitigate capillary leak, and improve outcomes in this critically ill population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.