Author, date and country | Patient group | Study type (level of evidence) | Outcomes | Key results | Study Weaknesses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Schierhout G and Roberts I 1998 UK | A variety of critically ill patient groups were included in this review of 26 trials. Mortality data for 1315 patients from 19 trials. | Systematic review of randomized trials | Mortality from all causes at end of follow up period | Colloid was associated with an increased absolute risk of mortality of 4% (95% CI 0-8%) when compared with crystalloid. Pooled relative risk of mortality for colloid was 1.29 (95% CI 0.94-1.77) | Incomparable mixed patient groups including sepsis. Different fluid regimens between trials. Length of follow up varied from 1 day to 5 years. Only 19 of the 26 trials reported on mortality. There were concerns regarding the methodological quality of several of the included trials. Statistically not significant as CI crosses 1. |
Choi P, Yip G et al 1999 Canada | Adult patients (814) requiring fluid resuscitation in 17 trials. | Systematic review of randomized trials | Mortality | No apparent difference between isotonic crystalloid and colloid resuscitation | Power of aggregated data was insufficient. Methodological limitations of primary studies, including blinding, were noted. Only 3 included critically ill non-trauma patients including sepsis. |
Rivers E et al 2001 USA | 263 patients with severe sepsis/ septic shock presenting to an urban ED. | Prospective randomized trial | In hospital mortality within 60 days | Higher mortality in standard therapy (ST) group than in the Early Goal Directed Therapy (EGDT) group (P=0.009) ST group received fluids at clinicians’ discretion. EGDT group received 500ml boluses of crystalloid every 30 minutes +/- blood transfusions. | Possibility of subversion of randomization in small blocks of pre-randomized numbers. ST patients stayed significantly shorter duration in ED; where EGDT patients at least for 6 hours. 10.25% (27) didn’t complete initial 6hour study period. ST group received some form of goal directed therapy. Supported by industry. |
Finfer S et al (The SAFE Study investigators) 2004 Australia & New Zealand | 7000 adults (>18 years) in ITU requiring fluid treatment; 1218 were with severe sepsis. 4% Albumin vs normal saline | Prospective double-blind randomized controlled trail | Death from any cause within 28 days after randomly included in the trial. All patients | Relative risk of death for albumin 0.99 (95% CI 0.91-1.09 P=0.87) when compared with saline | 3.8% (267) didn’t complete the trial. Under powered especially for subgroup analysis. Other fluids been administered due to error & clinicians’ preference. Greater volume of blood been transfused for albumin group than saline group. Possibility that concurrent interventions could have influenced results. Funded by CSL; 2 authors own shares in CSL. |
Patients with severe sepsis | Relative risk of death for albumin 0.87 (95% CI 0.74-1.02 P=0.09) when compared with saline | ||||
Vincent J and Gerlach H 2004 Germany | A systematic review, giving graded recommendations (A to E, A being the highest) using modified Delphi methodology. | Should colloids be used in preference to crystalloids in initial resuscitation from septic shock? | Recommendation – Grade C (Uncertain) No evidence-based support for one type of fluid over another | None of the meta-analyses specifically focused on patients with severe sepsis/ septic shock. | |
McIntyre LA et al 2007 Canada | 496 patients with severe sepsis admitted to ICU. | A retrospective multicentre cohort study | Hospital Mortality; ICU Mortality | No association between hospital or ICU mortality and type of fluid (crystalloids vs crystalloids + colloids) administered in the first six hours after diagnosis of severe sepsis was identified. | No evidence of sample size calculation. Potential for selection bias, information bias, confounding & residual confounding. Excluded patients’ (1643) charts were not screened for errors. Limited to ITU patients. |
Dellinger RP et al 2008 Surviving Sepsis Campaign: | Revision of 2004 guidelines based on an updated search into 2007 using GRADE system, a structured system for rating quality of evidence & grading strength of recommendations. High (A) to very low (D) quality of evidence. Strong recommendation (1) & weak (2). | Which fluid/s to use in resuscitation? | Recommends fluid resuscitation using crystalloids or colloids (1B) | Some authors have financial and/or academic competing interests in industry | |
McIntyre et al 2008 Canada | Hypotensive adult patients with at least 2 SIRs criteria and suspected or confirmed sepsis presenting to 3 centres in Canada and 1 in New Zealand. | Prospective multicentre randomised pilot trial comparing saline with pentastarch fluids for resuscitation. | ITU mortality | 6/19 patients in the saline group died while on ITU compared with 6/21 patients in the pentastarch group. (P = .84). | Small study, designed as a pilot study. Study stopped early due to published data suggesting an increased risk of renal failure in septic patients treated with pentastarch fluids. |
28 day mortality | 6/19 patients in the saline group died within 28 days compared with 9/21 patients in the pentastarch group. P = .46. | ||||
Wiedermann 2008 Italy | 12 trials involving total of 1062 patients. | Systematic review of randomised trials comparing the use of hydroxyethyl starch fluids with other fluids for resuscitation of patients with sepsis. | Renal failure | Fluids based on hydroxyethyl starch increase the risk of acute renal failure among patients with sepsis. | Meta-analysis not performed. |
Mortality | Fluids based on hydroxyethyl starch for fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis may reduce the probability of survival. |