Orbegozo Cortes D, Santacruz C, Donadello K, Nobile L, Taccone F S
Intensive Care Department, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), 1070, Brussels, Belgium -
Minerva Anestesiol. 2014 Aug;80(8):963-9. Epub 2014 Jun 13.
Fluid therapy is widely used in critically ill patients to restore effective intravascular volume and improve organ perfusion. Recent studies have questioned the administration of colloid-based solutions, especially if containing hydroxyethyl starch (HES), in different ICU populations; however, there is still uncertainty on the use of colloids as initial fluid therapy for early resuscitation.
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of two different resuscitation fluid strategies on the mortality of patients with shock. In a multicentric (57 ICUs), controlled, open-label trial (from February 2003 to August 2012), the authors randomized patients with signs of acute hypovolemia, defined by the combination of hypotension, evidence of low filling pressures or cardiac index and at least two signs of tissue hypoperfusion (such as altered consciousness, mottled skin, oliguria, lactate levels > 2 mmol/L), to received either a colloid- or crystalloid-based therapy. Both cohorts received maintenance fluids consisting in isotonic crystalloids and albumin in case of severe hypoalbuminemia (<2 g/dL). Exclusion criteria included previous fluid therapy, pregnancy, brain death, extended burns, chronic hemodialysis or liver disease, known coagulopathy, acute anaphylaxis, dehydration and hypotension due to sedative drugs.
Among the 6498 eligible patients, 2857 were eventually randomized in one of the two groups. The 28-day mortality was 25.4% in the colloid and 27.0% in the crystalloid group (P=0.26). In the sub-group analysis, similar mortality rates were reported for shock due to hypovolemia, sepsis or trauma. Also, the use of continuous renal replacement therapy was similar between groups (11.0% vs. 12.5%, P=0.19). There were more days alive without mechanical ventilation or vasopressors during the first 7 and 28 days and a lower 90-day mortality in the colloid group.
These data suggest that mortality was not increased and probably decreased with the use of colloids in different forms of shock requiring early fluid resuscitation. We discussed herein some methodological issues that may explain the discrepancies of this trial with the other studies developed in the same field.
液体疗法广泛应用于危重症患者,以恢复有效的血管内容量并改善器官灌注。近期研究对不同重症监护病房(ICU)人群中基于胶体的溶液的使用提出了质疑,尤其是含有羟乙基淀粉(HES)的溶液;然而,对于胶体作为早期复苏的初始液体疗法的使用仍存在不确定性。
本研究的目的是调查两种不同的复苏液体策略对休克患者死亡率的影响。在一项多中心(57个ICU)、对照、开放标签试验(2003年2月至2012年8月)中,作者将有急性低血容量体征的患者随机分组,急性低血容量由低血压、低充盈压或心脏指数的证据以及至少两种组织灌注不足的体征(如意识改变、皮肤花斑、少尿、乳酸水平>2 mmol/L)组合定义,分别接受基于胶体或晶体的治疗。两个队列均接受维持液体,严重低白蛋白血症(<2 g/dL)时为等渗晶体和白蛋白。排除标准包括先前的液体疗法、妊娠、脑死亡、大面积烧伤、慢性血液透析或肝病、已知的凝血障碍、急性过敏反应、脱水以及镇静药物引起的低血压。
在6498名符合条件的患者中,最终2857名被随机分为两组之一。胶体组28天死亡率为25.4%,晶体组为27.0%(P = 0.26)。在亚组分析中,低血容量、脓毒症或创伤性休克的死亡率相似。此外,两组间连续肾脏替代治疗的使用情况相似(11.0%对12.5%,P = 0.19)。胶体组在最初7天和28天内无机械通气或血管升压药的存活天数更多,90天死亡率更低。
这些数据表明,在需要早期液体复苏的不同形式休克中,使用胶体不会增加死亡率,甚至可能降低死亡率。我们在此讨论了一些方法学问题,这些问题可能解释了本试验与同一领域其他研究结果的差异。