Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Milan, Italy.
Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Intensive Care Med. 2019 Jan;45(1):21-32. doi: 10.1007/s00134-018-5415-2. Epub 2018 Nov 19.
An international team of experts in the field of fluid resuscitation was invited by the ESICM to form a task force to systematically review the evidence concerning fluid administration using basic monitoring. The work included a particular emphasis on pre-ICU hospital settings and resource-limited settings. The work focused on four main questions: (1) What is the role of clinical assessment to guide fluid resuscitation in shock? (2) What basic monitoring is required to perform and interpret a fluid challenge? (3) What defines a fluid challenge in terms of fluid type, ranges of volume, and rate of administration? (4) What are the safety endpoints during a fluid challenge? The expert panel found insufficient evidence to provide recommendations according to the GRADE system, and was only able to make recommendations for basic interventions, based on the available evidence and expert opinion. The panel identified significant gaps in the scientific evidence on fluid administration outside the ICU (excluding the operating theater). Globally, scientific communities and health care systems should address these critical gaps in evidence through research on how basic fluid administration in resource-rich and resource-limited settings can be improved for the benefit of patients and societies worldwide.
一个国际专家小组在液体复苏领域受到 ESICM 的邀请,组成一个工作组,系统地审查有关使用基本监测进行液体管理的证据。这项工作特别强调了 ICU 前医院环境和资源有限的环境。这项工作集中在四个主要问题上:(1)临床评估在指导休克液体复苏中的作用是什么?(2)进行和解释液体挑战需要哪些基本监测?(3)在液体类型、容量范围和给予速度方面,什么定义了液体挑战?(4)在液体挑战期间有哪些安全终点?专家组发现,根据 GRADE 系统提供建议的证据不足,只能根据现有证据和专家意见,为基本干预措施提供建议。专家组确定了 ICU 外(不包括手术室)液体管理的科学证据存在重大差距。在全球范围内,科学社区和医疗保健系统应通过研究如何在资源丰富和资源有限的环境中改进基本液体管理,以造福全世界的患者和社会,来解决这些关键证据差距。