Article

Perioperative buffered versus non-buffered fluid administration for surgery in adults

Department of Anaesthesia, UCL Centre for Anaesthesia, 3rd floor Podium, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, London, UK, NW1 2BU.
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 5.94). 01/2012; 12(12):CD004089. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004089.pub2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Perioperative fluid therapy influences clinical outcomes following major surgery. Fluid preparations may be based on a simple non-buffered salt solution, such as normal saline, or may be modified with bicarbonate or bicarbonate precursor buffers, such as maleate, gluconate, lactate or acetate, to better reflect the human physiological state. These latter fluids have theoretical advantages over normal saline in preventing hyperchloraemic acidosis. A number of clinical studies have now compared fluid preparations with and without a buffer to achieve a balanced electrolyte solution for perioperative fluid resuscitation.
To review the safety and efficacy of perioperative administration of buffered versus non-buffered fluids for plasma volume expansion or maintenance in adult patients undergoing surgery.
We electronically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2011), EMBASE (1980 to May 2011), and CINAHL (1982 to May 2011). We handsearched conference abstracts and where possible, contacted leaders in the field.
We only included randomized trials of buffered versus non-buffered intravenous fluids for perioperative fluid resuscitation. The trials with other forms of comparisons such as crystalloids versus colloids and colloids versus different colloids were excluded. We also excluded trials using hypertonic fluids and dextrose-based fluids.
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of clinical trials. We resolved any disagreements by discussion. We contacted the trial authors to provide additional information where appropriate. We presented pooled estimates of the dichotomous outcomes as odds ratios (OR) and on continuous outcomes as mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We analysed data on Review Manager 5.1 using fixed-effect models, and when heterogeneity was high (I² > 40%) random-effect models were used.
We identified 14 publications reporting 13 trials or comparisons with a total of 706 participants. For many of the outcomes reported, there was significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity. The primary outcome of mortality at any time was reported in only three studies with a total of 267 patients. The mortality rate was 2.9% for the buffered fluids group and 1.5% for the non-buffered fluids group but this difference was not statistically significant. The Peto OR was 1.85 (95% CI 0.37 to 9.33, P = 0.45, I(2)= 0%). Organ dysfunction was only presented for renal impairment. There was no difference in renal insufficiency leading to renal replacement therapy between the buffered and non-buffered groups (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.63, P = 0.32, I(2) = 0%). Markers of organ system failure as assessed by urine output, creatinine and its variables (for renal function), PaC0(2) (respiratory function) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (gastro-intestinal function) showed a statistically significant difference only in PaC0(2) levels. The mean difference was 1.18 with lower PaC0(2) levels in the non-buffered fluid group (95% CI 0.09 to 2.28, P = 0.03, I(2) = 0%) compared to the buffered fluid group.There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss nor the volumes of intraoperative red cell or fresh frozen plasma transfused between groups. There was an increase in platelet transfusion in the non-buffered group which was statistically significant after analysing the transformed data (log transformation because the data were highly skewed).A number of metabolic differences were noted. There was a difference in postoperative pH of 0.06 units, lower in the non-buffered fluid group (95% CI 0.04 to 0.08, P < 0.00001, I(2) = 74%). However, this difference was not maintained on postoperative day one. The non-buffered fluid group also had significantly greater base deficit, serum sodium and chloride levels.There was no difference demonstrated in length of hospital stay and no data were reported on cost or quality of life.
The administration of buffered fluids to adult patients during surgery is equally safe and effective as the administration of non-buffered saline-based fluids. The use of buffered fluids is associated with less metabolic derangement, in particular hyperchloraemia and metabolic acidosis. Larger studies are needed to assess robust outcomes such as mortality.

0 Followers
 · 
174 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute non-anion gap metabolic acidosis, also termed hyperchloremic acidosis, is frequently detected in seriously ill patients. The most common mechanisms leading to this acid-base disorder include loss of large quantities of base secondary to diarrhea and administration of large quantities of chloride-containing solutions in the treatment of hypovolemia and various shock states. The resultant acidic milieu can cause cellular dysfunction and contribute to poor clinical outcomes. The associated change in the chloride concentration in the distal tubule lumen might also play a role in reducing the glomerular filtration rate. Administration of base is often recommended for the treatment of acute non-anion gap acidosis. Importantly, the blood pH and/or serum bicarbonate concentration to guide the initiation of treatment has not been established for this type of metabolic acidosis; and most clinicians use guidelines derived from studies of high anion gap metabolic acidosis. Therapeutic complications resulting from base administration such as volume overload, exacerbation of hypertension and reduction in ionized calcium are likely to be as common as with high anion gap metabolic acidosis. On the other hand, exacerbation of intracellular acidosis due to the excessive generation of carbon dioxide might be less frequent than in high anion gap metabolic acidosis because of better tissue perfusion and the ability to eliminate carbon dioxide. Further basic and clinical research is needed to facilitate development of evidence-based guidelines for therapy of this important and increasingly common acid-base disorder.
    02/2015; 8(1):93-9. DOI:10.1093/ckj/sfu126
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fluid resuscitation is essential for the survival of critically ill patients in shock, regardless of the origin of shock. A number of crystalloids and colloids (synthetic and natural) are currently available, and there is strong controversy regarding which type of fluid should be administered and the potential adverse effects associated with the use of these products, especially the development of renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy. Recently, several clinical trials and metaanalyses have suggested the use of hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) to be associated with an increased risk of death and kidney failure, and data have been obtained showing clinical benefit with the use of crystalloids that contain a lesser concentration of sodium and chlorine than normal saline. This new information has increased uncertainty among clinicians regarding which type of fluid should be used. We therefore have conducted a review of the literature with a view to developing practical recommendations on the use of fluids in the resuscitation phase in critically ill adults.
    Medicina Intensiva 02/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.medin.2014.12.007 · 1.24 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We summarize the emerging new literature regarding the pathophysiological principles underlying the beneficial and deleterious effects of fluid administration during resuscitation, as well as current recommendations and recent clinical evidence regarding specific colloids and crystalloids. This systematic review allows us to conclude that there is no clear benefit associated with the use of colloids compared to crystalloids and no evidence to support the unique benefit of albumin as a resuscitation fluid. Hydroxyethyl starch use has been associated with increased acute kidney injury (AKI) and use of renal replacement therapy. Other synthetic colloids (dextran and gelatins) though not well studied do not appear superior to crystalloids. Normal saline (NS) use is associated with hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis and increased risk of AKI. This risk is decreased when balanced salt solutions are used. Balanced crystalloid solutions have shown no harmful effects, and there is evidence for benefit over NS. Finally, fluid resuscitation should be applied in a goal-directed manner and targeted to physiologic needs of individual patients. The evidence supports use of fluids in volume-responsive patients whose end-organ perfusion parameters have not been met.
    12/2014; 4:38. DOI:10.1186/s13613-014-0038-4

Full-text

Download
211 Downloads
Available from
Jun 10, 2014