Literature DB >> 18582303

Preferences for colloid use in Scandinavian intensive care units.

.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fluid resuscitation is a frequent intervention in intensive care. Colloids are widely used, but recent data suggest harm by some of these solutions. This calls for more clinical studies on this matter, but the current preferences for colloid use in Scandinavian intensive care units (ICUs) are unknown.
METHODS: In March-May 2007, 120 Scandinavian ICUs were invited to answer a web-based survey consisting of 18 questions on types of colloids, indications, contraindications and rationale of use.
RESULTS: Seventy-three ICUs, of which 31 were university hospital units, answered the questionnaire. Most ICUs used both synthetic and natural colloids, and hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 130/0.4 was the preferred colloid in 59 units. Eleven ICUs had protocols for colloid use. The most frequent indication was second-line fluid for hypovolaemia, but one in three ICUs used colloids as first-line fluid. Thirty-five ICUs had contraindications, which were mainly for the use of synthetic colloids (acute renal failure 25 units, bleeding 15 units). Most units based the use of colloids on theoretical knowledge and tradition. Sixty-five and 54 ICUs were ready to change colloid use based on data from randomised trials of ICU patients showing changes in mortality or renal function, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Most Scandinavian ICUs use both synthetic and natural colloids, but HES 130/0.4 is by far the preferred colloid. Few units have protocols for colloid use, but most use them for hypovolaemia, and the majority have no contraindications. Most ICUs are ready to change colloid use if randomised trials in ICU patients show changes in mortality or renal function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18582303     DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2008.01690.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand        ISSN: 0001-5172            Impact factor:   2.105


  13 in total

Review 1.  Randomised trials of 6% tetrastarch (hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 or 0.42) for severe sepsis reporting mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Amit Patel; Umeer Waheed; Stephen J Brett
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Resuscitation fluid use in Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Units between 2007 and 2013.

Authors:  N E Hammond; C Taylor; M Saxena; B Liu; S Finfer; P Glass; I Seppelt; L Willenberg; J Myburgh
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Evidence-based fluid therapy.

Authors:  Anders Perner; Konrad Reinhart
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 4.  Are renal adverse effects of hydroxyethyl starches merely a consequence of their incorrect use?

Authors:  Christiane S Hartog; Frank M Brunkhorst; Christoph Engel; Andreas Meier-Hellmann; Maximilian Ragaller; Tobias Welte; Evelyn Kuhnt; Konrad Reinhart
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 1.704

5.  Volume expansion in the first 4 days of shock: a prospective multicentre study in 19 French intensive care units.

Authors:  Thierry Boulain; Julie Boisrame-Helms; Stephan Ehrmann; Jean-Baptiste Lascarrou; Adrien Bouglé; Arnaud Chiche; Karim Lakhal; Stéphane Gaudry; Sébastien Perbet; Arnaud Desachy; Séverin Cabasson; Isabelle Geneau; Patricia Courouble; Noémie Clavieras; Pablo L Massanet; Frédéric Bellec; Yoan Falquet; François Réminiac; Philippe Vignon; Pierre-François Dequin; Ferhat Meziani
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  The Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial: protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of fluid resuscitation with 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) compared to 0.9% sodium chloride (saline) in intensive care patients on mortality.

Authors: 
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-02-10       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 7.  Colloid solutions: a clinical update.

Authors:  Tomi T Niemi; Ryo Miyashita; Michiaki Yamakage
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2010-10-17       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 8.  Systematic analysis of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) reviews: proliferation of low-quality reviews overwhelms the results of well-performed meta-analyses.

Authors:  Christiane S Hartog; Helga Skupin; Charles Natanson; Junfeng Sun; Konrad Reinhart
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Comparing the effect of hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 with balanced crystalloid solution on mortality and kidney failure in patients with severe sepsis (6S--Scandinavian Starch for Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock trial): study protocol, design and rationale for a double-blinded, randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  Anders Perner; Nicolai Haase; Jørn Wetterslev; Anders Aneman; Jyrki Tenhunen; Anne Berit Guttormsen; Gudmundur Klemenzson; Frank Pott; Karen Doris Bødker; Per Martin Bådstøløkken; Asger Bendtsen; Peter Søe-Jensen; Hamid Tousi; Morten Bestle; Malgorzata Pawlowicz; Robert Winding; Hans-Henrik Bülow; Claude Kancir; Morten Steensen; Jonas Nielsen; Bjarne Fogh; Kristian R Madsen; Nils H Larsen; Marcela Carlsson; Jørgen Wiis; John Asger Petersen; Susanne Iversen; Ole Schøidt; Siv Leivdal; Pawel Berezowicz; Ville Pettilä; Esko Ruokonen; Pål Klepstad; Sari Karlsson; Maija Kaukonen; Juha Rutanen; Sigurbergur Karason; Anne Lene Kjældgaard; Lars Broksø Holst; Jan Wernerman
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Higher vs. lower fluid volume for septic shock: clinical characteristics and outcome in unselected patients in a prospective, multicenter cohort.

Authors:  Søren H Smith; Anders Perner
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 9.097

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.