4.5 Review

How safe is gelatin? A systematic review and meta-analysis of gelatin-containing plasma expanders vs crystalloids and albumin

期刊

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
卷 35, 期 -, 页码 75-83

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2016.04.011

关键词

Plasma substitutes; Colloids; Anaphylaxis; Renal insufficiency; Bleeding; Adverse effects

资金

  1. Center for Sepsis Control and Care at the Jena University Hospital
  2. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [FKZ: 01EO1002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gelatin is a widely used synthetic colloid resuscitation fluid. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse effects in randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing gelatin with crystalloid or albumin for treatment of hypovolemia. Multiple databases were searched systematically without language restrictions until August 2015. We assessed risk of bias of individual studies and certainty in evidence assessment by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Sixty studies were eligible, including 30 randomized controlled trials, 8 nonrandomized studies, and 22 animal studies. After gelatin administration, the risk ratios were 1.15 (95% confidence interval, 0.96-1.38) for mortality, 1.10 (0.86-1.41) for requiring allogeneic blood transfusion, 1.35 (0.58-3.14) for acute kidney injury, and 3.01 (1.27-7.14) for anaphylaxis. Well-performed nonrandomized trials found increased rates of hospital mortality and acute kidney injury or renal replacement therapy in the gelatin intervention periods. Between 17% and 31% of administered gelatin was taken up extravascularly. The mean crystalloid-to-colloid ratio was 1.4. Gelatin solutions increase the risk of anaphylaxis and may be harmful by increasing mortality, renal failure, and bleeding possibly due to extravascular uptake and coagulation impairment. Until well-designed randomized controlled trials show that gelatin is safe, we caution against the use of gelatins because cheaper and safer fluid alternatives are available. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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