Coloides versus cristaloides en fluidoterapia guiada por objetivos, revisión sistemática y metaanálisis. Demasiado pronto o demasiado tarde para obtener conclusiones

Javier Ripollés , Ángel Espinosa , Rubén Casans , Ana Tirado , Alfredo Abad , Cristina Fernández , José Calvo
{"title":"Coloides versus cristaloides en fluidoterapia guiada por objetivos, revisión sistemática y metaanálisis. Demasiado pronto o demasiado tarde para obtener conclusiones","authors":"Javier Ripollés ,&nbsp;Ángel Espinosa ,&nbsp;Rubén Casans ,&nbsp;Ana Tirado ,&nbsp;Alfredo Abad ,&nbsp;Cristina Fernández ,&nbsp;José Calvo","doi":"10.1016/j.bjanes.2014.07.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Several clinical trials on Goal directed fluid therapy (GDFT) were carried out, many of those using colloids in order to optimize the preload. After the decision of European Medicines Agency, there is such controversy regarding its use, benefits, and possible contribution to kidney failure. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the use of last-generation colloids, derived from corn, with crystalloids, in GDFT, to determine complications and mortality associated associated.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A bibliographic research was carried out in MEDLINE Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, corroborating randomized clinical trials in those crystalloids are compared to colloids in GDFT for mayor non-cardiac surgery in adults.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>One hundred thirty references were found, among those 38 were selected, and 29 analyzed; of these, 6 were included for systematic review and meta-analysis, including 390 patients. It was perceived that the use of colloids it not associated with the increase of complications, but rather with a tendency to a higher mortality (RR [95% IC] 3.87 [1.121, 13, 38]); I<sup>2</sup> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.0%; <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.635).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusiones</h3><p>Due to this meta-analysis’ limitations for small number of randomized clinical trials and patients included, the results should be taken cautiously, and it is proposed to carry out new randomized clinical trials, with enough statistical power, comparing balanced and non-balanced colloids to balanced and non-balanced crystalloids, following the protocols of GDFT, respecting current guidelines and suggestions made by groups of experts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100199,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)","volume":"65 4","pages":"Pages 281-291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjanes.2014.07.002","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255496314001056","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction

Several clinical trials on Goal directed fluid therapy (GDFT) were carried out, many of those using colloids in order to optimize the preload. After the decision of European Medicines Agency, there is such controversy regarding its use, benefits, and possible contribution to kidney failure. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the use of last-generation colloids, derived from corn, with crystalloids, in GDFT, to determine complications and mortality associated associated.

Methods

A bibliographic research was carried out in MEDLINE Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, corroborating randomized clinical trials in those crystalloids are compared to colloids in GDFT for mayor non-cardiac surgery in adults.

Results

One hundred thirty references were found, among those 38 were selected, and 29 analyzed; of these, 6 were included for systematic review and meta-analysis, including 390 patients. It was perceived that the use of colloids it not associated with the increase of complications, but rather with a tendency to a higher mortality (RR [95% IC] 3.87 [1.121, 13, 38]); I2 = 0.0%; P = .635).

Conclusiones

Due to this meta-analysis’ limitations for small number of randomized clinical trials and patients included, the results should be taken cautiously, and it is proposed to carry out new randomized clinical trials, with enough statistical power, comparing balanced and non-balanced colloids to balanced and non-balanced crystalloids, following the protocols of GDFT, respecting current guidelines and suggestions made by groups of experts.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
目标导向的液体治疗中的胶体与晶体,系统综述和荟萃分析。得出结论太早或太晚了
针对目标导向液体疗法(GDFT)进行了几项临床试验,其中许多试验使用胶体来优化预负荷。在欧洲药品管理局做出决定后,关于其使用、益处和可能对肾衰竭的影响存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是比较上一代玉米胶体和晶体在GDFT中的使用,以确定并发症和死亡率。方法在MEDLINE Pubmed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆中进行文献研究,证实将这些晶体与胶体在成人非心脏外科手术中进行GDFT的随机临床试验进行比较。结果共检索文献130篇,选取38篇,分析29篇;其中6例纳入系统评价和荟萃分析,包括390例患者。我们认为胶体的使用与并发症的增加无关,而是与更高的死亡率相关(RR [95% IC] 3.87 [1.121, 13,38]);i2 = 0.0%;p = .635)。结论由于本meta分析纳入的随机临床试验和患者数量较少,因此应谨慎对待结果,并建议开展新的随机临床试验,具有足够的统计能力,根据GDFT的方案,尊重现行指南和专家组的建议,比较平衡和不平衡的胶体与平衡和不平衡的晶体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Manejo anestésico para la cirugía de atresia de esófago en un neonato con síndrome de Goldenhar Eficacia analgésica del bloqueo del plano transverso del abdomen ecoguiado-revisión sistemática Comparación de los efectos profilácticos del droperidol y del ondansetrón sobre el prurito provocado por la morfina subaracnoidea Endarterectomía carotídea: revisión de 10 años de práctica de la anestesia general y locorregional en un hospital terciario en Portugal Efecto de la rotación de la cabeza en la presión intraocular en decúbito ventral: estudio aleatorizado
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1