F Bunn1, P Alderson, V Hawkins. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, UK, WC1N 1EH. f.bunn@ich.ucl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume, however doubts remain as to their benefits. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Injuries Group specialised register, The Cochrane Controlled trials register (all years), MEDLINE (1994-98), EMBASE (1974-98) were searched. Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched and drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi randomised trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement. The main outcomes measured were death, amount of whole blood transfused and incidence of adverse reactions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. MAIN RESULTS: 46 trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2884 participants. Many of the trials were small. In the majority of trials quality was poor or uncertain. Deaths were obtained from 27 trials. Twenty three trials recorded the amount of blood transfused, however quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Thirteen trials recorded adverse reactions, but none occurred. For albumin or PPF versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 20 trials reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.17 (95% CI 0.91, 1.50). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin 3 trials reported mortality. The RR was 0.99 (0.69, 1.42). For gelatin vs HES 3 trials reported mortality, RR was 0.97 (0.65, 1.44). RR was not estimable in the albumin vs dextran, gelatin vs dextran, and HES vs dextran groups. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.
BACKGROUND: Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume, however doubts remain as to their benefits. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Injuries Group specialised register, The Cochrane Controlled trials register (all years), MEDLINE (1994-98), EMBASE (1974-98) were searched. Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched and drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi randomised trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement. The main outcomes measured were death, amount of whole blood transfused and incidence of adverse reactions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. MAIN RESULTS: 46 trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2884 participants. Many of the trials were small. In the majority of trials quality was poor or uncertain. Deaths were obtained from 27 trials. Twenty three trials recorded the amount of blood transfused, however quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Thirteen trials recorded adverse reactions, but none occurred. For albumin or PPF versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 20 trials reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.17 (95% CI 0.91, 1.50). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin 3 trials reported mortality. The RR was 0.99 (0.69, 1.42). For gelatin vs HES 3 trials reported mortality, RR was 0.97 (0.65, 1.44). RR was not estimable in the albumin vs dextran, gelatin vs dextran, and HES vs dextran groups. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.