Conservative fluid management or deresuscitation for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome following the resuscitation phase of critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 7k Downloads
It is unknown whether a conservative approach to fluid administration or deresuscitation (active removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy) is beneficial following haemodynamic stabilisation of critically ill patients.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategies in adults and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the post-resuscitation phase of critical illness.
We searched Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from 1980 to June 2016, and manually reviewed relevant conference proceedings from 2009 to the present. Two reviewers independently assessed search results for inclusion and undertook data extraction and quality appraisal. We included randomised trials comparing fluid regimens with differing fluid balances between groups, and observational studies investigating the relationship between fluid balance and clinical outcomes.
Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Marked clinical heterogeneity was evident. In a meta-analysis of 11 randomised trials (2051 patients) using a random-effects model, we found no significant difference in mortality with conservative or deresuscitative strategies compared with a liberal strategy or usual care [pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.02, I 2 = 0 %]. A conservative or deresuscitative strategy resulted in increased ventilator-free days (mean difference 1.82 days, 95 % CI 0.53–3.10, I 2 = 9 %) and reduced length of ICU stay (mean difference −1.88 days, 95 % CI −0.12 to −3.64, I 2 = 75 %) compared with a liberal strategy or standard care.
In adults and children with ARDS, sepsis or SIRS, a conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategy results in an increased number of ventilator-free days and a decreased length of ICU stay compared with a liberal strategy or standard care. The effect on mortality remains uncertain. Large randomised trials are needed to determine optimal fluid strategies in critical illness.
KeywordsFluid therapy Diuretics Water–electrolyte balance Critical Illness Sepsis Respiratory distress syndrome, adult Systemic inflammatory response syndrome
The authors wish to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of information specialists Ms. Viola Machel, Ms. Melanie Anderson, and Ms. Marina Englesakis (University Health Network) and Richard Fallis (Queen’s University of Belfast) in the development and implementation of the search strategies; Ms. Adrienne Ruddock for assistance with image preparation, and Dr. Hong Guo Parke, Dr. Edmund Skibowski, Ms. Ya-Chi Del Sorbo and Ms. Chuer Zhang for translation of non-English manuscripts. This work was supported by a doctoral fellowship award to JS by the Northern Ireland Health and Social Care research and development division.
Compliance with the ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there are no conflicts of interest.
- 8.Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) (2011) The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. http://handbook.cochrane.org/
- 10.Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D et al (2016) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa Hopsital Research Institute. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed 29 Apr 2016
- 22.Wang L, Long X, Lv M (2014) Effect of different liquid management strategies on the prognosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome. J Dalian Med Univ 36:140–143Google Scholar
- 25.Benakatti G, Singhi S, Jayshree M, Bansal A (2014) Ped Crit Care Med 15(Suppl 4):30Google Scholar
- 26.Hjortrup PB, Haase N, Bundgaard H et al (2016) Restricting volumes of resuscitation fluid in adults with septic shock after initial management: the CLASSIC randomised, parallel-group, multicentre feasibility trial. Intensive Care Med. doi: 10.1007/s00134-016-4500-7
- 30.Botdorf J, Kashyap R, O’Horo JC et al (2015) Retrospective analysis of fluid balance in the first 48 hours of sepsis and outcome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 191:A4497Google Scholar
- 41.Perez-Fernandez XL, Sabater J, Koborzan MR et al (2011) Fluid balance on early stages of septic shock patients with continuous renal replacement techniques. Intensive Care Med 35:970Google Scholar
- 42.Raimundo M, Ferreira N, Marques A et al (2012) Impact of fluid balance in the outcome of septic critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med 38:696Google Scholar
- 44.Udeozo OI, Selby MG, Cartin-Ceba R et al (2009) Early but not late fluid resuscitation was associated with improved outcome in septic shock. Blood Purif 27:282Google Scholar
- 48.Wilkowski A, Goeckenjan G (1988) Effect of fluid withdrawal on pulmonary course and prognosis of acute lung failure. Intensivmed Notfmed 25:10–16Google Scholar
- 54.Rodriguez A, De Haro C, Teixido C et al (2013) Fluid balance in patients with severe sepsis and/or septic shock. Intensive Care Med 39:14Google Scholar
- 61.Kongsayreepong S, Nitikaroon P (2013) Early acute kidney injury in postoperative severe sepsis/septic shock septic admitting to general surgical intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 39:0181Google Scholar
- 70.ARDS Definition Task Force, Ranieri VM, Rubenfeld GD et al (2012) Acute respiratory distress syndrome: the Berlin definition. JAMA 307:2526–2533Google Scholar
- 71.Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB et al (1992) Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 101:1644–1655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar