ArticleBJA open2026
Albumin versus crystalloid and microcirculatory blood flow in ischaemia/reperfusion-induced spinal cord injury: a randomised porcine trial.
Article in BJA open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spinal cord injury caused by ischaemia/reperfusion is a severe complication of aortic repair surgeries. Albumin may stabilise the endothelial barrier and preserve microcirculatory blood flow more effectively than crystalloids. This study tested whether albumin-based fluid therapy improves spinal cord microcirculation compared with crystalloid-based therapy in a porcine ischaemia/reperfusion model. Methods: Forty Duroc pigs were randomly assigned to receive albumin-based or crystalloid-based fluid therapy. Ischaemia/reperfusion injury was induced by 45 min of supracoeliac aortic cross-clamping. The primary outcome was spinal cord microcirculatory blood flow 4.5 h after the intervention. Secondary outcomes included spinal cord tissue oxygenation, somatosensory-evoked potentials, histopathology, and macrohaemodynamic variables. Results: Mean spinal cord microcirculatory blood flow (327.2 [95% confidence interval: 228.8-425.6] Conclusions: Albumin-based fluid therapy did not improve spinal cord microcirculatory blood flow, oxygenation, or histopathological and functional outcomes compared with crystalloid-based therapy in this porcine model of ischaemia/reperfusion-induced spinal cord injury. This trial suggests testing whether albumin can improve spinal cord microcirculatory blood flow in trials in patients is not warranted. Clinical trial number and registry URL: AnimalStudyRegistry.org, https://doi.org/10.17590/asr.0000297.
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.