RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Balanced crystalloids compared to normal saline for fluid therapy in critically ill adult patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.08.24.21262515
DO 10.1101/2021.08.24.21262515
A1 Naomi E Hammond
A1 Fernando G Zampieri
A1 Tessa Garside
A1 Derek Adigbli
A1 Gian Luca Di Tanna
A1 Alexandre B Cavalcanti
A1 Flavia R Machado
A1 Sharon Micallef
A1 John Myburgh
A1 Mahesh Ramanan
A1 Todd W Rice
A1 Matthew Semler
A1 Paul J Young
A1 Balasubramanian Venkatesh
A1 Simon Finfer
A1 Anthony Delaney
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/08/28/2021.08.24.21262515.abstract
AB Introduction The choice of intravenous fluid for fluid therapy in critically ill adult patients remains a matter of debate. Currently, crystalloids are used more often than colloids, with ongoing controversy over the relative efficacy and safety of buffered salt solutions (BSS) versus normal saline (0.9% sodium chloride). In 2021 two large pragmatic trials enrolling critically ill patients will add substantial new data to address this controversy. We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that will include the data from these two trials to provide clinicians with the most up to date evidence and robust evidence to guide their choice of crystalloid fluids.Methods and analysis We will include RCTs that compare the effect of buffered salt solutions to normal saline for fluid resuscitation and/or fluid therapy in critically ill adults, on all-cause mortality and other patient centred outcomes. We will perform a search that includes the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, and clinical trial registries. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, perform full article reviews and extract study data, with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer. We will report study characteristics and assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool. We will perform Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects aggregate data meta-analysis whenever it is feasible to do so. We will evaluate overall certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.Ethics and dissemination This systematic review and meta-analysis does not require ethical approval as it does not involve primary data collection. We will publish our results in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and present them at national and international scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021243399Strengths and limitations of this review [box]This systematic review will provide up-to-date evidence to answer the focused clinical question: In adult patients who are critically ill, does administering balanced crystalloid solutions for fluid therapy reduce mortality and other patient-centered outcomes, compared with administering 0.9% sodium chloride?We will conduct a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines, searching three electronic databases, clinical trial registries and published conference abstracts, with two independent reviewers evaluating studies and extracting data.A meta-analysis will assess the primary outcome of all-cause mortality at 90 days and secondary outcomes of ventilator and vasopressor free days, renal replacement therapy use, incidence of acute kidney injury, and patient quality of life outcomes.The limitations of this review include the clinical heterogeneity of the included trials, diversity of the targeted population receiving fluid therapy, variability in the composition of balanced crystalloid solutions, and timing of initiation of study crystalloids. We will address all limitations with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework.Competing Interest StatementAll the trial authors (except TG, DA) are members of management committee of RCTs to be included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. NH, JM, BV, AD and SF institution has received research funding from Baxter Healthcare.Funding StatementThere is no external funding for this review. The George Institute for Global Health is providing in-kind support for this review. NH and JM are supported by National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) investigator grants. SF supported by NHMRC fellowship. BV supported by a Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Practitioner Fellowship.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This review does not require ethical approval as this is a systematic review of published studies. The results of this systematic review will be presented at national and international scientific meetings, will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal for publication and made available on publicly accessible institutional websites. The results of the trial level meta-analysis will not be publicly released prior to the results of all individual trials being publicly available without the express consent of the component trial authors.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesResults are available in published studies