Active fluid de-resuscitation in critically ill patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Messmer, Anna S; Dill, Tatjana; Müller, Martin; Pfortmueller, Carmen A (2023). Active fluid de-resuscitation in critically ill patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European journal of internal medicine, 109, pp. 89-96. Elsevier 10.1016/j.ejim.2023.01.009

[img]
Preview
Text
1-s2.0-S0953620523000146-main.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY).

Download (1MB) | Preview

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of active fluid de-resuscitation on mortality in critically ill patients with septic shock.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library databases. Trials investigating active fluid de-resuscitation and reporting data on mortality in patients with septic shock were eligible. The primary objective was the impact of active de-resuscitation in patients with septic shock on short-term mortality. Secondary outcomes were whether de-resuscitation lead to a fluid separation, and the impact of de-resuscitation on patient-centred outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials (8,030 patients) were included in the systematic review, whereof 5 randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the meta-analysis. None of the RCTs showed a reduction in mortality with active de-resuscitation measures (relative risk (RR) 1.12 [95%-CI 0.84 - 1.48]). Fluid separation was achieved by two RCTs. Evidence from non-randomised trials suggests a mortality benefit with de-resuscitation strategies and indicates a trend towards a more negative fluid balance. Patient-centred outcomes were not influenced in the RCTs, and only one non-randomised trial revealed an impact on the duration of mechanical ventilation and renal replacement requirement (RRT).

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence for superiority of active fluid de-resuscitation compared to usual care regarding mortality, fluid balance or patient-centred outcomes in patients with septic shock. Current evidence is limited by the lack of high-quality RCTs in patients with septic shock, the small sample sizes and the heterogeneity of the applied de-resuscitation techniques. In addition, validity of the majority of RCTs is compromised by their inability to achieve fluid separation.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine and Anaesthesiology (DINA) > University Emergency Center
04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine and Anaesthesiology (DINA) > Clinic of Intensive Care

UniBE Contributor:

Messmer, Anna Sarah, Dill, Tatjana, Müller, Martin (B), Pfortmüller, Carmen

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

1879-0828

Publisher:

Elsevier

Language:

English

Submitter:

Pubmed Import

Date Deposited:

16 Jan 2023 11:26

Last Modified:

29 Mar 2023 23:38

Publisher DOI:

10.1016/j.ejim.2023.01.009

PubMed ID:

36635127

Uncontrolled Keywords:

De-resuscitation Diuretics Fluid overload Fluid removal Renal replacement therapy Septic shock

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/177360

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/177360

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback