Sodium chloride 0.45% / Glucose 2.5% infusion 500ml polyethylene bottles
Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Official medicine documents
Yellow Card
Report side effects (MHRA)
Drug safety updates
MHRA alerts for Glucose + Sodium chloride
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
Search EudraVigilance database
Browse substances A–Z in the European adverse reaction database
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
1 branded products available
MHRA licensed products
View all licensed products for Glucose + Sodium chloride on the MHRA register
Sodium chloride 0.45% / Glucose 2.5% infusion 500ml polyethylene bottles
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
NHS prescribing volume and spending trends
Guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
NICE clinical guidance(13)
Intravenous fluid therapy in children and young people in hospital (NG29)
Diarrhoea and vomiting caused by gastroenteritis in under 5s: diagnosis and management (CG84)
Intravenous fluid therapy in adults in hospital (CG174)
Intravenous fluid therapy in children and young people in hospital (QS131)
Diabetes (type 1 and type 2) in children and young people: diagnosis and management (NG18)
Neonatal parenteral nutrition (NG154)
Cystic fibrosis: diagnosis and management (NG78)
Adrenal insufficiency: identification and management (NG243)
Acute kidney injury: prevention, detection and management (NG148)
Healthcare-associated infections: prevention and control in primary and community care (CG139)
i STAT CG4+ and CHEM8+ cartridges for point-of-care testing in the emergency department (MIB38)
Meningitis (bacterial) and meningococcal disease: recognition, diagnosis and management (NG240)
Infection prevention and control (QS61)
Source: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
Browse tools
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. ATC codes from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (whocc.no).
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 7 · Randomised trials: 6 · 1966–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
H. Heerspink, B. Perkins, D. Fitchett, et al.
Circulation, 2016
Chan HY, Li D, Yu AS, et al.
2026
Background Current understanding of acute kidney injury (AKI) risk factors remains largely descriptive, offering limited precision into how specific biomarker values or physiologic thresholds influence susceptibility. We aimed to synthesize knowledge from machine learning models trained across multiple health systems to identify generalizable, value-specific risk drivers and biomarker interactions contributing to AKI risk. Methods We analyzed electronic health records (EHRs) from 785,497 adult inpatients between 2010 and 2019 across nine U.S. academic medical centers within PCORnet. Interpretable gradient boosting machine models were independently developed at each health system to quantify predictor-outcome associations. Meta-regression was applied to integrate these site-level results, characterize nonlinear value-risk relationships, and identify bivariate interactions between predictors. Result Meta-analysis revealed consistent, value-specific risk drivers across health systems. An increase in glucose from 100 mg/dL to 140 mg/dL was associated with a 1.46-fold higher risk of AKI. Chloride and anion gap also demonstrated elevated AKI risk with risk increases overlapping portions of their reference ranges, with anion gap showing a 1.14-fold increase across 4–12 mmol/L and chloride a 1.28-fold increase across 96–100 mEq/L. Electrolytes including potassium, calcium, and sodium showed quadratic associations with AKI risk. Bivariate meta-regression identified interactions between key predictors, highlighting pathways that jointly modulate AKI risk. Conclusion This cross-system meta-analysis synthesizes machine learning-derived evidence into clinically interpretable knowledge, revealing how specific biomarker ranges and interactions modulate AKI risk. By moving beyond surface-level associations to quantitative, generalizable physiologic thresholds, these findings provide actionable insights to enhance risk stratification and personalized prevention in hospital care. Highlights Cross-system meta-analysis uncovered generalizable, value-specific AKI risk drivers Glucose, chloride, and anion gap within reference ranges linked to higher AKI risk Key predictor interactions suggest coordinated pathways jointly modulating AKI risk
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
M. Packer, C. Wilcox, J. Testani
Circulation, 2023
Weintraub L, Fielding CL, Carli IB, et al.
2026
BackgroundAdministration of intravenous fluids prior to competition is common at major equestrian competitions, yet few studies have evaluated the benefits of this practice.Aims/objectiveThe hypothesis was that pre-ride intravenous fluid therapy would be associated with a lower heart rate and improved laboratory hydration parameters during or after the ride.Methods14 client owned horses entered in a 45 km ride in extreme heat and terrain were randomly assigned to receive IV fluids (IVF) or no IV fluids (NIV) the day before the ride. Blood samples and physical examination findings were collected at 6 time points: Home (T0), check in the day before the ride (T1), 2-3 h after catheterization and treatment (T2), 1 h pre-ride (T3), 32 km into the ride (T4), and the end of the ride (T5). Physical examination and laboratory parameters (bicarbonate, sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium, glucose, lactate, BUN, creatinine, PCV and total protein) were evaluated using 2-way ANOVA.ResultsThe total protein concentration at T2 was 0.5 g/dL lower in the IVF group (95 % CI, -1.0 to -0.01 g/dL) compared with the NIV. The BUN concentration at T4 was 4 mg/dL lower in the IVF group (p = 0.02; 95 % CI, -7.3 to -0.9 mg/dL) compared with the NIV. There was no significant difference in heart rates between the IVF and NIV group (36 ± 5 bpm and 39 ± 3 bpm, respectively; p = 0.23).ConclusionsThe use of intravenous fluids prior to riding in extreme conditions may not have clinically significant hydration benefits.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Juett LA, van der Wolf-Ong J, Gyamfi PA, et al.
2026
- Dehydration
- Water
- Glucose
BackgroundPrevious studies indicate that sports drinks may improve rehydration, compared to water, an effect likely achieved by manufacturing sports drinks to contain carbohydrates and sodium. However, there is a growing preference for natural products and a "food first" approach to sports nutrition. Fruit juices naturally contain similar concentrations of carbohydrates to sports drinks, but fruit juices may produce a more stable blood glucose profile. Fruit juices also naturally contain electrolytes, particularly potassium, but their potential as effective rehydration alternatives to sports drinks, which have higher sodium concentrations, is not well understood. This study compared the rehydration efficacy and glucose responses following consumption of a 100% fruit juice (Raw Hydrate®; FRU), a glucose-based sports drink (SPO), and water (WAT) after exercise-induced hypohydration. Importantly, rehydration beverages were matched for water volume, rather than total volume, to ensure that any potential differences in water balance were not due to unequal water volumes between trials, a limitation affecting previous rehydration research.MethodsAfter familiarization, 17 adults (age: 28 ± 8 years; BMI: 23.8 ± 2.9 kg/m2) completed three trials in a randomized cross-over design. The participants cycled in the heat (~35°C) to induce ~2% body mass loss (BML), then rehydrated over a 1 h period in a laboratory (~21°C) with a water volume equivalent to 150% of BML from either FRU, SPO, or WAT. This was followed by an additional 4 h of seated rest (5 h rehydration period), when blood glucose was measured (0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, and 2 h after beverage consumption), and all urine produced was collected.ResultsDuring the 5 h rehydration period, there was no effect of trial on total urine volume (FRU: 1266 ± 403 mL, SPO: 1338 ± 361 mL, WAT: 1394 ± 360 mL; P = 0.156) or water retention (FRU: 42 ± 12%, SPO: 37 ± 10%, WAT: 35 ± 11%; P = 0.059). The blood glucose area under the curve differed by trial (P P ConclusionRehydration efficacy was similar between all beverages, but each elicited a distinct glycemic response. For sports drink consumers seeking a natural alternative or implementing a "food first" nutritional strategy, switching to a 100% fruit juice will not compromise rehydration effectiveness, but may elicit a lower blood glucose response. Although, it should be noted that an additional three participants were withdrawn from the study because of gastrointestinal issues after consuming the 100% fruit juice. This was likely a product of the present study's design, where a large volume of 100% fruit juice (average ~2,300 mL) was consumed in a short period of time (1 h). Whilst this is a commonly used study design to robustly assess the rehydration efficacy of different beverages, future studies should distribute fluid intake over a longer duration, in order to improve ecological validity and reduce the risk of gastrointestinal issues.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Ford S, La Caze A, Coombes I, et al.
2026
- Hypoglycemia
- Hyperkalemia
- Insulin
Balzer, Felix, Weiss, Bjoern, Strauß, Christian, et al.
BMJ Publishing Group, 2025
Yan-Cai Li, Yanmei Zhong, Ya-Yun Zhang, et al.
Sensors and Actuators B-chemical, 2015
J. Lawitts, J. Biggers
Molecular Reproduction and Development, 1992
Zimmermann, Paul, Wachsmuth, Nadine, Eckstein, Max L., et al.
MDPI, 2022
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Scientific data (pharmacology, interactions, ADME) is not yet available for this medicine. Clinical sections are sourced from the NHS dm+d database.