Reviews2 September 2014
A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis
    Author, Article, and Disclosure Information
    Background:

    Fluid resuscitation is the cornerstone of sepsis treatment. However, whether balanced or unbalanced crystalloids or natural or synthetic colloids confer a survival advantage is unclear.

    Purpose:

    To examine the effect of different resuscitative fluids on mortality in patients with sepsis.

    Data Sources:

    MEDLINE, EMBASE, ACP Journal Club, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through March 2014.

    Study Selection:

    Randomized trials that evaluated different resuscitative fluids in adult patients with sepsis or septic shock and death. No language restrictions were applied.

    Data Extraction:

    Two reviewers extracted data on study characteristics, methods, and outcomes. Risk of bias for individual studies and quality of evidence were assessed.

    Data Synthesis:

    14 studies (18 916 patients) were included with 15 direct comparisons. Network meta-analysis at the 4-node level showed higher mortality with starches than with crystalloids (high confidence) and lower mortality with albumin than with crystalloids (moderate confidence) or starches (moderate confidence). Network meta-analysis at the 6-node level showed lower mortality with albumin than with saline (moderate confidence) and low-molecular-weight starch (low confidence) and with balanced crystalloids than with saline (low confidence) and low- and high-molecular-weight starches (moderate confidence).

    Limitations:

    These trials were heterogeneous in case mix, fluids evaluated, duration of fluid exposure, and risk of bias. Imprecise estimates for several comparisons in this network meta-analysis contribute to low confidence in most estimates of effect.

    Conclusion:

    Among patients with sepsis, resuscitation with balanced crystalloids or albumin compared with other fluids seems to be associated with reduced mortality.

    Primary Funding Source:

    The Hamilton Chapter of the Canadian Intensive Care Foundation and the Critical Care Medicine Residency Program and Critical Care Division Alternate Funding Plan at McMaster University.

    References

    • 1. Brunkhorst FMEngel CBloos FMeier-Hellmann ARagaller MWeiler Net alGerman Competence Network Sepsis (SepNet)Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med2008;358:125-39. [PMID: 18184958] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa070716 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 2. Finfer SBellomo RBoyce NFrench JMyburgh JNorton RSAFE Study InvestigatorsA comparison of albumin and saline for fluid resuscitation in the intensive care unit. N Engl J Med2004;350:2247-56. [PMID: 15163774] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 3. Myburgh JAFinfer SBellomo RBillot LCass AGattas Det alCHEST InvestigatorsHydroxyethyl starch or saline for fluid resuscitation in intensive care. N Engl J Med2012;367:1901-11. [PMID: 23075127] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1209759 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 4. Perner AHaase NGuttormsen ABTenhunen JKlemenzson GÅneman Aet al6S Trial GroupHydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer's acetate in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med2012;367:124-34. [PMID: 22738085] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 5. Haase NPerner AHennings LISiegemund MLauridsen BWetterslev Met alHydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 versus crystalloid or albumin in patients with sepsis: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. BMJ2013;346:f839. [PMID: 23418281] doi:10.1136/bmj.f839 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 6. Guidet BMartinet OBoulain TPhilippart FPoussel JFMaizel Jet alAssessment of hemodynamic efficacy and safety of 6% hydroxyethylstarch 130/0.4 vs. 0.9% NaCl fluid replacement in patients with severe sepsis: The CRYSTMAS study. Crit Care2012;16:R94. [PMID: 22624531] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 7. Bunn FTrivedi DColloid solutions for fluid resuscitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012;7:CD001319. [PMID: 22786474] doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001319.pub5 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 8. Delaney APDan AMcCaffrey JFinfer SThe role of albumin as a resuscitation fluid for patients with sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med2011;39:386-91. [PMID: 21248514] doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181ffe217 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 9. Gattas DJDan AMyburgh JBillot LLo SFinfer SCHEST Management CommitteeFluid resuscitation with 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) in acutely ill patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg2012;114:159-69. [PMID: 22184610] doi:10.1213/ANE.0b013e318236b4d6 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 10. Perel PRoberts IKer KColloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2013;2:CD000567. [PMID: 23450531] doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000567.pub6 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 11. Zarychanski RAbou-Setta AMTurgeon AFHouston BLMcIntyre LMarshall JCet alAssociation of hydroxyethyl starch administration with mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients requiring volume resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA2013;309:678-88. [PMID: 23423413] doi:10.1001/jama.2013.430 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 12. Wilkes MMNavickis RJPatient survival after human albumin administration. A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med2001;135:149-64. [PMID: 11487482] LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 13. Bellomo RProwle JREcheverri JELigabo VRonco CFluid management in septic acute kidney injury and cardiorenal syndromes. Contrib Nephrol2010;165:206-18. [PMID: 20427971] doi:10.1159/000313760 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 14. Haase NPerner AHydroxyethyl starch for resuscitation. Curr Opin Crit Care2013;19:321-5. [PMID: 23743591] doi:10.1097/MCC.0b013e3283632de6 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 15. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Safety Communication: boxed warning on increased mortality and severe renal injury, and additional warning on risk of bleeding, for use of hydroxyethyl starch solutions in some settings. 25 November 2013. Accessed at www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/safetyavailability/ucm358271.htm on 6 September 2013. Google Scholar
    • 16. Annane DSiami SJaber SMartin CElatrous SDeclère ADet alCRISTAL InvestigatorsEffects of fluid resuscitation with colloids vs crystalloids on mortality in critically ill patients presenting with hypovolemic shock: the CRISTAL randomized trial. JAMA2013;310:1809-17. [PMID: 24108515] doi:10.1001/jama.2013.280502 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 17. Morgan TJThe ideal crystalloid—what is ‘balanced’? Curr Opin Crit Care2013;19:299-307. [PMID: 23743589] doi:10.1097/MCC.0b013e3283632d46 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 18. Yunos NMBellomo RHegarty CStory DHo LBailey MAssociation between a chloride-liberal vs chloride-restrictive intravenous fluid administration strategy and kidney injury in critically ill adults. JAMA2012;308:1566-72. [PMID: 23073953] doi:10.1001/jama.2012.13356 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 19. Myburgh JAMythen MGResuscitation fluids. N Engl J Med2013;369:1243-51. [PMID: 24066745] doi:10.1056/NEJMra1208627 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 20. Lobo DNIntravenous 0.9% saline and general surgical patients: a problem, not a solution [Editorial]. Ann Surg2012;255:830-2. [PMID: 22470080] doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318250766c CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 21. Rochwerg BWludarczyk ASzczeklik WAlhazzani WSindi AAlshamsi Fet alFISSH groupFluid resuscitation in severe sepsis and septic shock: systematic description of fluids used in randomized trials. Pol Arch Med Wewn2013;123:603-8. [PMID: 24185099] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 22. Rivers ENguyen BHavstad SRessler JMuzzin AKnoblich Bet alEarly Goal-Directed Therapy Collaborative GroupEarly goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med2001;345:1368-77. [PMID: 11794169] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 23. Jiwaji ZBrady SMcIntyre LAHiggins AGray AWalsh TSEmergency department management of early sepsis: a national survey of emergency medicine and intensive care consultants.Emerg Med J. Emerg Med J2013;38:266-73. [PMID: 24005642] doi:10.1136/emermed-2013-202883 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 24. Jones DMcEvoy SMerz TMHiggins ABellomo RCooper JDet alInternational albumin use: 1995 to 2006. Anaesth Intensive Care2010;38:266-73. [PMID: 20369758] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 25. Bansal MFarrugia ABalboni SMartin GRelative survival benefit and morbidity with fluids in severe sepsis—a network meta-analysis of alternative therapies. Curr Drug Saf2013;8:236-45. [PMID: 23909705] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 26. Miller DRUpdate to readers and authors on ethical and scientific misconduct: retraction of the “Boldt articles” [Editorial]. Can J Anaesth2011;58:777-81. [PMID: 21800211] doi:10.1007/s12630-011-9558-7 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 27. Reilly CRetraction. Notice of formal retraction of articles by Dr. Joachim Boldt. Br J Anaesth2011;107:116-7. [PMID: 21685126] doi:10.1093/bja/aer068 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 28. Higgins JPAltman DGGøtzsche PCJüni PMoher DOxman ADet alet alCochrane Bias Methods GroupThe Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ2011;343:d5928. [PMID: 22008217] doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 29. Guyatt GH, Busse J. Methods commentary: risk of bias in randomized trials 1. Evidence Partners. 2011. Accessed at http://distillercer.com/resources/methodological-resources/risk-of-bias-commentary/ on 13 September 2013. Google Scholar
    • 30. Jansen JPCope SMeta-regression models to address heterogeneity and inconsistency in network meta-analysis of survival outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol2012;12:152. [PMID: 23043545] doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-152 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 31. Jansen JPNaci HIs network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers. BMC Med2013;11:159. [PMID: 23826681] doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-159 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 32. Mills EJIoannidis JPThorlund KSchünemann HJPuhan MAGuyatt GHHow to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis. JAMA2012;308:1246-53. [PMID: 23011714] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 33. Gelman ARubin DBInferences from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Stat Sci1992;7:457-72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 34. Balshem HHelfand MSchünemann HJOxman ADKunz RBrozek Jet alGRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol2011;64:401-6. [PMID: 21208779] doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 35. Guyatt GHOxman ADVist GEKunz RFalck-Ytter YAlonso-Coello Pet alGRADE Working GroupGRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ2008;336:924-6. [PMID: 18436948] doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 36. Guyatt GHRennie DUsers' guides to the medical literature [Editorial]. JAMA1993;270:2096-7. [PMID: 8411578] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 37. Dubin APozo MOCasabella CAMurias GPálizas FMoseinco MCet alComparison of 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 and saline solution for resuscitation of the microcirculation during the early goal-directed therapy of septic patients. J Crit Care2010;25:659. [PMID: 20813485] doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.04.007 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 38. Haupt MTRackow ECColloid osmotic pressure and fluid resuscitation with hetastarch, albumin, and saline solutions. Crit Care Med1982;10:159-62. [PMID: 6174274] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 39. Li FSun HHan XD[The effect of different fluids on early fluid resuscitation in septic shock]. Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue2008;20:472-5. [PMID: 18687174] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 40. Lv JZhao HYLiu FAn YZ[The influence of lactate Ringer solution versus hydroxyethyl starch on coagulation and fibrinolytic system in patients with septic shock]. Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue2012;24:38-41. [PMID: 22248750] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 41. McIntyre LAFergusson DCook DJRankin NDhingra VGranton Jet alCanadian Critical Care Trials GroupFluid resuscitation in the management of early septic shock (FINESS): a randomized controlled feasibility trial. Can J Anaesth2008;55:819-26. [PMID: 19050085] doi:10.1007/BF03034053 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 42. Rackow ECMecher CAstiz MEGriffel MFalk JLWeil MHEffects of pentastarch and albumin infusion on cardiorespiratory function and coagulation in patients with severe sepsis and systemic hypoperfusion. Crit Care Med1989;17:394-8. [PMID: 2468447] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 43. Schortgen FLacherade JCBruneel FCattaneo IHemery FLemaire Fet alEffects of hydroxyethylstarch and gelatin on renal function in severe sepsis: a multicentre randomised study. Lancet2001;357:911-6. [PMID: 11289347] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 44. BaSES trial: Basel Starch Evaluation in Sepsis. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00273728. Accessed at http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT00273728 on 8 July 2014. Google Scholar
    • 45. Levy MMFink MPMarshall JCAbraham EAngus DCook Det alSCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med2003;31:1250-6. [PMID: 12682500] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 46. Caironi PTognoni GMasson SFumagalli RPesenti ARomero Met alALBIOS Study InvestigatorsAlbumin replacement in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. N Engl J Med2014;370:1412-21. [PMID: 24635772] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1305727 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 47. Finfer SMcEvoy SBellomo RMcArthur CMyburgh JNorton RSAFE Study InvestigatorsImpact of albumin compared to saline on organ function and mortality of patients with severe sepsis. Intensive Care Med2011;37:86-96. [PMID: 20924555] doi:10.1007/s00134-010-2039-6 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar