Comparison of Balanced Crystalloids versus Normal Saline in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
{"title":"Comparison of Balanced Crystalloids versus Normal Saline in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Yi Chen, Yongli Gao","doi":"10.2147/TCRM.S416785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fluid resuscitation is routinely needed for critically ill patients. However, the optimal choice between crystalloids and normal saline is in heat debate.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To conduct a meta-analysis comparing normal saline and balanced crystalloids in the treatment of critically ill patients with composite mortality as the primary outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to March 2022. Studies of critically ill adult patients assigned to receive normal saline or balanced crystalloids were included. We conducted a meta-analysis using an inverse variance, random-effects model in addition to trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcome was composite mortality. Subgroup analyses were also conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen full-text studies (n=36,224) were included. Balanced crystalloids were associated with lower mortality compared with normal saline (risk ratio [RR]=0.96; 95% confidential interval [CI] 0.93, 1; p=0.03; <i>I<sup>2</sup></i>=0) and lower incidence of acute kidney injury/acute renal failure (RR =0.93; 95% CI = 0.87, 0.99; p=0.03). No significant difference was observed in other outcomes. In the sepsis patients, the balanced crystalloid showed a lower composite mortality rate compared with normal saline (RR =0.91; 95% CI = 0.85, 0.99; p=0.02). TSA analysis demonstrated that, with 80% power, the effect of balanced crystalloid is not larger than a 10% relative decrease in composite mortality compared with normal saline.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>This study demonstrated that balanced crystalloids could be an optimal choice over normal saline in critically ill patients to a reduced composite mortality rate. In patients with sepsis, the difference is especially significant. Nonetheless, the optimal resuscitation fluid option between saline and balanced crystalloid solutions should be investigated further with more evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":22977,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f6/a1/tcrm-19-783.PMC10577264.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S416785","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Fluid resuscitation is routinely needed for critically ill patients. However, the optimal choice between crystalloids and normal saline is in heat debate.
Objective: To conduct a meta-analysis comparing normal saline and balanced crystalloids in the treatment of critically ill patients with composite mortality as the primary outcome.
Methods: PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to March 2022. Studies of critically ill adult patients assigned to receive normal saline or balanced crystalloids were included. We conducted a meta-analysis using an inverse variance, random-effects model in addition to trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcome was composite mortality. Subgroup analyses were also conducted.
Results: Eighteen full-text studies (n=36,224) were included. Balanced crystalloids were associated with lower mortality compared with normal saline (risk ratio [RR]=0.96; 95% confidential interval [CI] 0.93, 1; p=0.03; I2=0) and lower incidence of acute kidney injury/acute renal failure (RR =0.93; 95% CI = 0.87, 0.99; p=0.03). No significant difference was observed in other outcomes. In the sepsis patients, the balanced crystalloid showed a lower composite mortality rate compared with normal saline (RR =0.91; 95% CI = 0.85, 0.99; p=0.02). TSA analysis demonstrated that, with 80% power, the effect of balanced crystalloid is not larger than a 10% relative decrease in composite mortality compared with normal saline.
Conclusion and relevance: This study demonstrated that balanced crystalloids could be an optimal choice over normal saline in critically ill patients to a reduced composite mortality rate. In patients with sepsis, the difference is especially significant. Nonetheless, the optimal resuscitation fluid option between saline and balanced crystalloid solutions should be investigated further with more evidence.
背景:危重病人通常需要液体复苏。然而,晶体和生理盐水之间的最佳选择仍在激烈争论中。目的:进行一项荟萃分析,比较生理盐水和平衡晶体治疗以复合死亡率为主要结果的危重患者。方法:检索PubMed、Embase、Medline、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆,从成立到2022年3月。包括对被分配接受生理盐水或平衡晶体治疗的危重成年患者的研究。除了试验序列分析(TSA)外,我们还使用逆方差随机效应模型进行了荟萃分析。主要结果是复合死亡率。还进行了分组分析。结果:纳入18项全文研究(n=36224)。与生理盐水相比,平衡晶体具有较低的死亡率(风险比[RR]=0.96;95%置信区间[CI]0.93,1;p=0.03;I2=0)和较低的急性肾损伤/急性肾衰竭发生率(RR=0.93;95%CI=0.87,0.99;p=0.03)。其他结果无显著差异。在败血症患者中,与生理盐水相比,平衡晶体显示出较低的复合死亡率(RR=0.91;95%CI=0.85,0.99;p=0.02)。TSA分析表明,在80%的功率下,平衡晶体的效果不大于与生理盐水相比较复合死亡率相对降低10%。结论和相关性:本研究表明,在危重患者中,平衡晶体可能是降低复合死亡率的最佳选择,而不是生理盐水。在败血症患者中,这种差异尤其显著。尽管如此,生理盐水和平衡晶体溶液之间的最佳复苏液选择应进一步研究,并提供更多证据。
期刊介绍:
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management is an international, peer-reviewed journal of clinical therapeutics and risk management, focusing on concise rapid reporting of clinical studies in all therapeutic areas, outcomes, safety, and programs for the effective, safe, and sustained use of medicines, therapeutic and surgical interventions in all clinical areas.
The journal welcomes submissions covering original research, clinical and epidemiological studies, reviews, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary. The journal will consider case reports but only if they make a valuable and original contribution to the literature.
As of 18th March 2019, Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
The journal does not accept study protocols, animal-based or cell line-based studies.