Department of Plastic, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Norwegian National Burn Center, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Department of Anaesthesiology, Division of Emergencies and Critical Care, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2022 Aug;66(7):795-802. doi: 10.1111/aas.14095. Epub 2022 Jun 16.
According to current guidelines, initial burn resuscitation should be performed with fluids alone. The aims of the study were to review the frequency of use of vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in initial burn resuscitation, and assess the benefits and harms of adding such drugs to fluids.
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, UpToDate, and SveMed+ through 3 December 2021. The search included studies on critically ill burn patients receiving vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in addition to fluids within 48 h after burn injury.
The literature search identified 1058 unique publications that were screened for inclusion. After assessing 115 publications in full text, only two retrospective cohort studies were included. One study found that 16 out of 52 (31%) patients received vasopressor(s). Factors associated with vasopressor use were increasing age, burn depth, and % total body surface area (TBSA) burnt. Another study observed that 20 out of 111 (18%) patients received vasopressor(s). Vasopressor use was associated with increasing age, Baux score, and %TBSA burnt in addition to more frequent dialysis treatment and increased mortality. Study quality assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was considered good in one study, but uncertain due to limited description of methods in the other.
This systematic review revealed that there is a lack of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of using vasoactive and/or inotropic drugs in addition to fluids during early resuscitation of patients with major burns.
根据现行指南,初始烧伤复苏应仅使用液体进行。本研究的目的是回顾在初始烧伤复苏中使用血管活性和/或正性肌力药物的频率,并评估将此类药物添加到液体中的益处和危害。
在 2021 年 12 月 3 日之前,通过 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 系统评价数据库、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、UpToDate 和 SveMed+进行了系统文献检索。该检索包括在烧伤伤后 48 小时内除液体外还接受血管活性和/或正性肌力药物治疗的危重病烧伤患者的研究。
文献检索共确定了 1058 篇独特的出版物,并对其进行了筛选以纳入研究。在全文评估了 115 篇出版物后,仅纳入了两项回顾性队列研究。一项研究发现,52 名患者中有 16 名(31%)接受了血管加压药。使用血管加压药的相关因素包括年龄增加、烧伤深度和全身表面积(TBSA)百分比。另一项研究观察到,111 名患者中有 20 名(18%)接受了血管加压药。血管加压药的使用与年龄增加、Baux 评分以及 TBSA 百分比的增加有关,此外还与更频繁的透析治疗和更高的死亡率有关。一项研究的 Newcastle-Ottawa 质量评估量表评估的研究质量被认为良好,但另一项研究由于方法描述有限而不确定。
本系统评价显示,在大面积烧伤患者的早期复苏中,除液体外使用血管活性和/或正性肌力药物的益处和危害缺乏证据。