4.2 Article

Albumin in Burn Shock Resuscitation: A Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Studies

期刊

JOURNAL OF BURN CARE & RESEARCH
卷 37, 期 3, 页码 E268-E278

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000201

关键词

-

资金

  1. CSL Behring, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania
  2. Baxter
  3. CSL Behring
  4. Grifols

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Critical appraisal of outcomes after burn shock resuscitation with albumin has previously been restricted to small relatively old randomized trials, some with high risk of bias. Extensive recent data from nonrandomized studies assessing the use of albumin can potentially reduce bias and add precision. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine the effect of burn shock resuscitation with albumin on mortality and morbidity in adult patients. Randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical studies evaluating mortality and morbidity in adult patients receiving albumin for burn shock resuscitation were identified by multiple methods, including computer database searches and examination of journal contents and reference lists. Extracted data were quantitatively combined by random-effects meta-analysis. Four randomized and four nonrandomized studies with 688 total adult patients were included. Treatment effects did not differ significantly between the included randomized and nonrandomized studies. Albumin infusion during the first 24 hours showed no significant overall effect on mortality. However, significant statistical heterogeneity was present, which could be abolished by excluding two studies at high risk of bias. After those exclusions, albumin infusion was associated with reduced mortality. The pooled odds ratio was 0.34 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.19 to 0.58 (P < .001). Albumin administration was also accompanied by decreased occurrence of compartment syndrome (pooled odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.50; P < .001). This meta-analysis suggests that albumin can improve outcomes of burn shock resuscitation. However, the scope and quality of current evidence are limited, and additional trials are needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据