Cargando…

Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?

In a recent issue of Critical Care, Brandt and colleagues report the effects of a 'liberal' fluid loading protocol compared to a more 'restrictive' protocol on hemodynamics and mortality in pigs in which septic shock had been induced. It appears that the former protocol was assoc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Groeneveld, AB Johan
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2875488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20092608
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc8201
_version_ 1782181583699050496
author Groeneveld, AB Johan
author_facet Groeneveld, AB Johan
author_sort Groeneveld, AB Johan
collection PubMed
description In a recent issue of Critical Care, Brandt and colleagues report the effects of a 'liberal' fluid loading protocol compared to a more 'restrictive' protocol on hemodynamics and mortality in pigs in which septic shock had been induced. It appears that the former protocol was associated with higher mortality in spite of improved hemodynamics compared to the latter. The results of the paper are discussed here in view of the scope and mechanisms of these findings. With regard to fluid resuscitation, they indicate that too much of an otherwise good thing is harmful, even if overhydration and edema formation seem to have been prevented. They also do not exclude a specific toxic effect of the larger volumes of hydroxyethyl starch in the 'liberal' strategy. The precise nature of a toxic effect remains obscure, however, but may involve the kidneys.
format Text
id pubmed-2875488
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28754882011-01-19 Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing? Groeneveld, AB Johan Crit Care Commentary In a recent issue of Critical Care, Brandt and colleagues report the effects of a 'liberal' fluid loading protocol compared to a more 'restrictive' protocol on hemodynamics and mortality in pigs in which septic shock had been induced. It appears that the former protocol was associated with higher mortality in spite of improved hemodynamics compared to the latter. The results of the paper are discussed here in view of the scope and mechanisms of these findings. With regard to fluid resuscitation, they indicate that too much of an otherwise good thing is harmful, even if overhydration and edema formation seem to have been prevented. They also do not exclude a specific toxic effect of the larger volumes of hydroxyethyl starch in the 'liberal' strategy. The precise nature of a toxic effect remains obscure, however, but may involve the kidneys. BioMed Central 2010 2010-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC2875488/ /pubmed/20092608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc8201 Text en Copyright ©2010 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Groeneveld, AB Johan
Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
title Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
title_full Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
title_fullStr Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
title_full_unstemmed Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
title_short Fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
title_sort fluids in septic shock: too much of a good thing?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2875488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20092608
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc8201
work_keys_str_mv AT groeneveldabjohan fluidsinsepticshocktoomuchofagoodthing