Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary Critical Care and Sleep, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.
Crit Care Med. 2019 Jul;47(7):951-959. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003779.
It is unclear if a low- or high-volume IV fluid resuscitation strategy is better for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock.
Prospective randomized controlled trial.
Two adult acute care hospitals within a single academic system.
Patients with severe sepsis and septic shock admitted from the emergency department to the ICU from November 2016 to February 2018.
Patients were randomly assigned to a restrictive IV fluid resuscitation strategy (≤ 60 mL/kg of IV fluid) or usual care for the first 72 hours of care.
We enrolled 109 patients, of whom 55 were assigned to the restrictive resuscitation group and 54 to the usual care group. The restrictive group received significantly less resuscitative IV fluid than the usual care group (47.1 vs 61.1 mL/kg; p = 0.01) over 72 hours. By 30 days, there were 12 deaths (21.8%) in the restrictive group and 12 deaths (22.2%) in the usual care group (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.41-2.53). There were no differences between groups in the rate of new organ failure, hospital or ICU length of stay, or serious adverse events.
This pilot study demonstrates that a restrictive resuscitation strategy can successfully reduce the amount of IV fluid administered to patients with severe sepsis and septic shock compared with usual care. Although limited by the sample size, we observed no increase in mortality, organ failure, or adverse events. These findings further support that a restrictive IV fluid strategy should be explored in a larger multicenter trial.
目前尚不清楚低容量还是高容量静脉补液复苏策略对严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者更有益。
前瞻性随机对照试验。
单个学术系统内的 2 家成人急性护理医院。
2016 年 11 月至 2018 年 2 月从急诊科收入 ICU 的严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者。
患者被随机分配至限制型静脉补液复苏策略(≤60mL/kg 的静脉补液)或前 72 小时接受常规护理。
我们共纳入 109 例患者,其中 55 例被分配至限制型复苏组,54 例被分配至常规护理组。限制型组在 72 小时内接受的复苏性静脉补液显著少于常规护理组(47.1 比 61.1mL/kg;p=0.01)。30 天时,限制型组有 12 例(21.8%)死亡,常规护理组有 12 例(22.2%)死亡(比值比,1.02;95%CI,0.41-2.53)。两组新发器官衰竭、医院或 ICU 住院时间或严重不良事件发生率无差异。
这项初步研究表明,与常规护理相比,限制型复苏策略可成功减少严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者的静脉补液量。尽管受到样本量限制,但我们未观察到死亡率、器官衰竭或不良事件增加。这些发现进一步支持在更大的多中心试验中探索限制型静脉补液策略。