Perel Pablo, Roberts Ian
Cochrane Injuries Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK, WC1E 7HT.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Mar 16(3):CD000567. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000567.pub4.
Colloid solutions are widely used in fluid resuscitation of critically ill patients. There are several choices of colloid and there is ongoing debate about the relative effectiveness of colloids compared to crystalloid fluids.
To assess the effects of colloids compared to crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients.
We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S), and The Controlled Trials metaRegister (www.controlled-trials.com). Reference lists of relevant studies and review articles were searched for further trials. The searches were last updated in September 2008.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of colloids compared to crystalloids, in patients requiring volume replacement. We excluded cross-over trials and trials in pregnant women and neonates.
Two authors independently extracted data and rated quality of allocation concealment. We analysed trials with a 'double-intervention', such as those comparing colloid in hypertonic crystalloid to isotonic crystalloid, separately. We stratified the analysis according to colloid type and quality of allocation concealment.
We identified 65 eligible trials; 56 of these presented mortality data.Colloids compared to crystalloidsAlbumin or plasma protein fraction - 23 trials reported data on mortality, including a total of 7754 patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) from these trials was 1.01 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.92 to 1.10). When we excluded the trial with poor quality allocation concealment, pooled RR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.09). Hydroxyethyl starch - 17 trials compared hydroxyethyl starch with crystalloids, n = 1172 patients. The pooled RR was 1.18 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.44). Modified gelatin - 11 trials compared modified gelatin with crystalloid, n = 506 patients. The pooled RR was 0.91 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.72). (When the trials by Boldt et al were removed from the three preceding analyses, the results were unchanged.) Dextran - nine trials compared dextran with a crystalloid, n = 834 patients. The pooled RR was 1.24 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.65).Colloids in hypertonic crystalloid compared to isotonic crystalloidEight trials compared dextran in hypertonic crystalloid with isotonic crystalloid, including 1283 randomised participants. Pooled RR was 0.88 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.05).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from RCTs that resuscitation with colloids reduces the risk of death, compared to resuscitation with crystalloids, in patients with trauma, burns or following surgery. As colloids are not associated with an improvement in survival, and as they are more expensive than crystalloids, it is hard to see how their continued use in these patients can be justified outside the context of RCTs.
胶体溶液广泛用于危重症患者的液体复苏。胶体有多种选择,关于胶体与晶体液相比的相对有效性存在持续的争论。
评估胶体与晶体液相比在危重症患者液体复苏中的效果。
我们检索了Cochrane损伤组专业注册库、CENTRAL(Cochrane图书馆2008年第3期)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、ISI科学网:科学引文索引扩展版(SCI-EXPANDED)、ISI科学网:会议论文引文索引-科学版(CPCI-S)以及对照试验元注册库(www.controlled-trials.com)。检索了相关研究和综述文章的参考文献列表以查找更多试验。检索最后更新于2008年9月。
将胶体与晶体液进行比较的随机对照试验(RCT),研究对象为需要容量补充的患者。我们排除了交叉试验以及孕妇和新生儿的试验。
两位作者独立提取数据并对分配隐藏的质量进行评分。我们分别分析了具有“双重干预”的试验,例如将高渗晶体液中的胶体与等渗晶体液进行比较的试验。我们根据胶体类型和分配隐藏质量对分析进行分层。
我们确定了65项符合条件的试验;其中56项提供了死亡率数据。
胶体与晶体液相比
白蛋白或血浆蛋白组分——23项试验报告了死亡率数据,共纳入7754例患者。这些试验合并后的相对危险度(RR)为1.01(95%置信区间(95%CI)0.92至1.10)。当我们排除分配隐藏质量差的试验后,合并RR为1.00(95%CI 0.91至1.09)。
羟乙基淀粉——17项试验将羟乙基淀粉与晶体液进行比较,n = 1172例患者。合并RR为1.18(95%CI 0.96至1.44)。
改良明胶——11项试验将改良明胶与晶体液进行比较,n = 506例患者。合并RR为0.91(95%CI 0.49至1.72)。(当从上述三项分析中排除Boldt等人的试验后,结果未变。)
右旋糖酐——9项试验将右旋糖酐与晶体液进行比较,n = 834例患者。合并RR为1.24(95%CI 0.94至1.65)。
高渗晶体液中的胶体与等渗晶体液相比
8项试验将高渗晶体液中的右旋糖酐与等渗晶体液进行比较,包括1283名随机参与者。合并RR为0.88(95%CI 0.74至1.05)。
随机对照试验没有证据表明,与晶体液复苏相比,胶体液复苏能降低创伤、烧伤或手术后患者的死亡风险。由于胶体液不能提高生存率,且比晶体液更昂贵,因此很难理解在随机对照试验之外,继续在这些患者中使用胶体液如何能得到合理的解释。