Paeds Vivas · acute-care-resuscitation-and-toxicology
Fluid bolus therapy and vasoactive support — branching viva
A branching viva following one shocked child through fluid bolus therapy with reassessment after each aliquot, the transition to vasoactive support for fluid-refractory shock, cold versus warm shock phenotyping, the FEAST caution, the dopamine downgrade, and early retrieval in a resource-limited setting.
On this page & tools
Target exams
Stage 1 — The first bolus
The child weighs 18 kilograms. The heart rate is 165 per minute, capillary refill is 4 seconds, skin is cool and mottled, pulses are weak, blood pressure is 75/45 mmHg, and the child is drowsy but responsive. [4]
Examiner: "What is your immediate fluid management and why?" [2]
I confirm septic shock from the integrated assessment: tachycardia, prolonged capillary refill, weak pulses, mottled skin, hypotension and altered consciousness. I give 10 to 20 mL per kilogram of isotonic crystalloid — 0.9 per cent sodium chloride or Hartmann solution — over 5 to 20 minutes. For this 18 kilogram child, that is 180 to 360 mL per aliquot. Before giving it, I state the improvement I expect: heart rate falling toward normal, shorter capillary refill, stronger pulses, warmer skin and improved interaction. I do not give it as a slow gravity drip — I use a push-pull technique or rapid infuser. [2] [3]
Examiner probes and model responses — Stage 1
Probe: "Why not give all the fluid at once?" Because the first-hour ceiling of 40 to 60 mL per kilogram is a maximum to reach through reassessed aliquots, not a single push. The purpose of the aliquot is to give, reassess, and decide. Giving all fluid at once removes the decision point and risks driving the child onto the flat portion of the Starling curve without detecting the signs of overload. [2] [9]
Probe: "What fluid do you choose?" Isotonic crystalloid — either 0.9 per cent sodium chloride or a balanced solution such as Hartmann or Plasma-Lyte. I avoid hypotonic fluids because they do not stay intravascular and can cause hyponatraemia. Albumin is not routinely first-line for the initial bolus. [2] [3]
Stage 2 — After two boluses with no improvement
After two aliquots of 20 mL per kilogram each (40 mL per kilogram total), the child remains mottled, the heart rate is still 160 per minute, capillary refill is still 4 seconds, and the blood pressure is now 70/40 mmHg. [2]
Examiner: "What do you do now?" [2]
This is fluid-refractory shock: 40 mL per kilogram has produced no sustained improvement. I stop giving further fluid blindly. I reassess for signs of overload before deciding on the next step. The child needs a vasoactive infusion now, not a third bolus. I call PICU and retrieval in parallel. [2] [3]
Examiner probes and model responses — Stage 2
Probe: "Which vasoactive agent do you start and why?" I choose based on the shock phenotype. This child has cold shock — cool mottled skin, weak pulses, prolonged capillary refill and a narrow pulse pressure. The first-line agent is adrenaline, starting at 0.05 to 0.5 micrograms per kilogram per minute, titrated to clinical response. If the child had warm shock — warm dry skin, bounding pulses, flash capillary refill, wide pulse pressure — I would use noradrenaline at the same dose range. [3] [4]
Probe: "Why not dopamine?" The Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2020 guideline recommends adrenaline or noradrenaline over dopamine for paediatric septic shock. Dopamine is now second-line. I would use it only if adrenaline or noradrenaline were not immediately available. [3]
Probe: "What access do you use?" Central venous access is preferred for vasoactive infusions, but intraosseous access is an acceptable rapid alternative. I do not delay the first vasoactive dose to place a central line — if IO is available now, I start through it and convert when safe. [3] [9]
Stage 3 — The rural setting and FEAST
The examiner reveals that this hospital has no paediatric intensive care and no vasoactive agents on site. Retrieval time is estimated at 90 minutes. [1]
Examiner: "How does the FEAST trial inform your approach here?" [1]
The FEAST trial randomised African children with severe febrile illness to bolus fluid (saline or albumin) versus no bolus and was stopped early because bolus fluid increased 48-hour mortality. Both fluid types caused harm. The correct lesson is that a fluid algorithm cannot be transplanted across populations, shock types and rescue resources. In this rural setting, I cannot escalate to vasoactive support on site, so I must be even more vigilant: I give aliquots with rigorous reassessment, I stop early for no benefit or overload, and I call retrieval at the outset, in parallel with the first bolus. I state the retrieval time, what treatment can continue, the deterioration plan and what to do if transport is delayed. [1] [2]
Examiner probes and model responses — Stage 3
Probe: "Does FEAST mean you should not give any fluid?" No. FEAST showed harm from bolus fluid in a specific population without intensive care rescue. In a well-resourced setting with PICU access, up-front boluses remain standard for septic shock with rigorous reassessment. Here, without vasoactive rescue on site, I apply a more cautious strategy and prioritise early retrieval. The fluid strategy fits the child and the setting. [1] [3]
Probe: "What is the single most important error to avoid?" Driving toward a fixed fluid volume without measuring the response. The ceiling of 40 to 60 mL per kilogram is a maximum, not a target. Each aliquot is followed by a full reassessment. If the child is not improving, I stop and escalate, even if the ceiling has not been reached. [2] [9]
References
- [1]Maitland, Kathryn Mortality after fluid bolus in African children with severe infection The New England journal of medicine, 2011.PMID 21615299
- [2]Weiss, Scott L Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock in Children 2026 Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies, 2026.PMID 41869844
- [3]Weiss, Scott L Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Septic Shock and Sepsis-Associated Organ Dysfunction in Children Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies, 2020.PMID 32032273
- [4]Bjorklund, Ashley Pediatric Shock Review Pediatrics in review, 2023.PMID 37777656
- [9]Gupta, Siddharth Advances in Shock Management and Fluid Resuscitation in Children Indian journal of pediatrics, 2023.PMID 36715864