Highlights
Especially the frail elderly show a high number of severe COVID-19.
Viral shedding may be increased in elderly patients.
Early identification is complicated due to atypical disease presentation.
Applying hygiene measures in patients with cognitive disorders is challenging.
The cardiorespiratory reserve is decreased increasing the risk of complications.
The aging immune system has a pro-inflammatory tendency, exaggerated by SARS-CoV-2.
ObjectiveIn this narrative review, an overview is given of the pros and cons of various crystalloid fluids used for infusion during initial resuscitation or maintenance phases in adult hospitalized patients. Special emphasis is given on dose, composition of fluids, presence of buffers (in balanced solutions) and electrolytes, according to recent literature. We also review the use of hypertonic solutions.MethodsWe extracted relevant clinical literature in English specifically examining patient-oriented outcomes related to fluid volume and type.ResultsA restrictive fluid therapy prevents complications seen with liberal, large-volume therapy, even though restrictive fluid loading with crystalloids may not demonstrate large hemodynamic effects in surgical or septic patients. Hypertonic solutions may serve the purpose of small volume resuscitation but carry the disadvantage of hypernatremia. Hypotonic solutions are contraindicated in (impending) cerebral edema, whereas hypertonic solutions are probably more helpful in ameliorating than in preventing this condition and improving outcome. Balanced solutions offer a better approach for plasma composition than unbalanced ones, and the evidence for benefits in patient morbidity and mortality is increasing, particularly by helping to prevent acute kidney injury.ConclusionsIsotonic and hypertonic crystalloid fluids are the fluids of choice for resuscitation from hypovolemia and shock. The evidence that balanced solutions are superior to unbalanced ones is increasing. Hypertonic saline is effective in mannitol-refractory intracranial hypertension, whereas hypotonic solutions are contraindicated in this condition.
IntroductionFluid administration in critically ill patients may affect acid-base balance. However, the effect of the fluid type used for resuscitation on acid-base balance remains controversial.MethodsWe studied the effect of fluid resuscitation of normal saline and the colloids gelatine 4%, hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 6%, and albumin 5% on acid-base balance in 115 clinically hypovolemic critically ill patients during a 90 minute filling pressure-guided fluid challenge by a post-hoc analysis of a prospective randomized clinical trial.ResultsAbout 1700 mL was infused per patient in the saline and 1500 mL in each of the colloid groups (P<0.001). Overall, fluid loading slightly decreased pH (P<0.001) and there was no intergroup difference. This mildly metabolic acidifying effect was caused by a small increase in chloride concentration and decrease in strong ion difference in the saline- and HES-, and an increase in (uncorrected) anion gap in gelatine- and albumin-loaded patients, independent of lactate concentrations.ConclusionIn clinically hypovolemic, critically ill patients, fluid resuscitation by only 1500–1700 mL of normal saline, gelatine, HES or albumin, resulted in a small decrease in pH, irrespective of the type of fluid used. Therefore, a progressive metabolic acidosis, even with increased anion gap, should not be erroneously attributed to insufficient fluid resuscitation.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN19023197
Non-invasively measured ISTI is able to predict and monitor fluid responsiveness after cardiac surgery non-inferiorly to invasively measured haemodynamic indices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.