Abstract:In the absence of evidence, therapies are often based on intuition, belief, common sense or gut feeling. Over the years, some treatment strategies may become dogmas that are eventually considered as state-of-the-art and not questioned any longer. This might be a reason why there are many examples of “strange” treatments in medical history that have been applied in the absence of evidence and later abandoned for good reasons.In this article, five dogmas relevant to critical care medicine are discussed and reviewed in the light of the available evidence. Dogma #1 relates to the treatment of oliguria with fluids, diuretics, and vasopressors. In this context, it should be considered that oliguria is a symptom rather than a disease. Thus, once hypovolaemia can be excluded as the underlying reason, there is no justification for giving fluids, which may do more harm than good in euvolaemic or hypervolaemic patients. Similarly, there is no solid evidence for forcing diuresis by administering vasopressors and loop diuretics. Dogma #2 addresses the treatment of crush syndrome patients with aggressive fluid therapy using NaCl 0.9%. In fact, this treatment may aggravate renal injury by iatrogenic metabolic acidosis and subsequent renal hypoperfusion. Dogma #3 concerns the administration of NaCl 0.9% to patients undergoing kidney transplantation. Since these patients are usually characterised by hyperkalaemia, the potassium-free solution NaCl 0.9%, containing exclusively 154 mmol/l of sodium and chloride ions each, is often considered as the fluid of choice. However, large volumes of chloride-rich solutions cause hyperchloraemic acidosis in a dose-dependent manner and induce a potassium shift to the extracellular space, thereby increasing serum potassium levels. Thus, balanced electrolyte solutions are to be preferred in this setting. Dogma #4 relates to the fact that enteral nutrition is often withheld for patients with high residual gastric volume due to the theoretical risk of gastro-oesophageal reflux, potentially resulting in aspiration pneumonitis. Despite controversial discussions, there is no clinical data supporting that residual gastric volume should be generally measured, especially not in patients without a gastro-intestinal surgery and/or motility disorders. Clinical evidence rather suggests that abandoning residual gastric volume monitoring does not increase the incidence of pneumonia, but may benefit patients by facilitating adequate enteral feeding. Finally, dogma #5 is about sedating all mechanically ventilated patients because “fighting” against the respirator may cause insufficient ventilation. This concern needs to be balanced against the unwanted consequences of sedation, such as prolonged mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit length of stay as well as increased risk of delirium. Modern concepts based on adequate analgesia and moderate to no sedation appear to be more suitable.In conclusion, dogmas are still common in clinical practice. Since science rather than fiction should govern our actions in intensive care medicine, it is important to remain critical and challenge long established concepts, especially when the underlying evidence is weak or non-existing.

Reply: Guideline recommendations don't exist in a vacuum

Debunking the myth: why wall suction should not be routine in pneumothorax treatment

Joint ERS/EACTS/ESTS clinical practice guidelines on adults with spontaneous pneumothorax

National survey on management of spontaneous pneumothorax from emergency department to specialised treatment: room for improvement

Nebulization of Antimicrobial Agents in Mechanically Ventilated Adults in 2017: an International Cross-Sectional Survey

Beyond the guidelines for non-invasive ventilation in acute respiratory failure: implications for practice

A response to a single cadaver study assessing the efficacy of two commercially available devices for airway foreign body relief

Author Response: Let It Breathe: Mastering Spontaneous Breathing Trials

Management of spontaneous pneumothorax: a mini-review on its latest evidence

National review of end-of-life care withdrawal guidelines for non-invasive advanced respiratory support using document analysis

Setting positive end-expiratory pressure: does the 'best compliance' concept really work?

An Evaluation of the Content Quality, Readability, and Reliability of Publicly Available Web-Based Information on Pneumothorax Surgery in Ireland

Tracheostomy care of non-ventilated patients and COVID considerations: A scoping review of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements

The nature of the response to airway management incident reports in high income countries: A scoping review

Effects of Different Treatment Regimens on Primary Spontaneous Pneumothorax: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Author's response to the letter "Japanese clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitation in critically ill patients 2023 (J-ReCIP 2023)"

Chest Drainage Therapy: What Comes out of Pandora's Box Can Affect Patient Outcomes

Providing safe and effective pleural medicine services in the UK: an aspirational statement from UK pleural physicians

Simple aspiration for spontaneous pneumothorax in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Science and fiction in critical care: established concepts with or without evidence?

Airway Clearance Using Suction Devices in Prehospital Combat Casualty Care: A Systematic Review