Albumin administration for fluid resuscitation in burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Burns : Journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries. 2016;43((1):):17-24
OBJECTIVE The objective was to systematically review the literature summarizing the effect on mortality of albumin compared to non-albumin solutions during the fluid resuscitation phase of burn injured patients. DATA SOURCES We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL and the content of two leading journals in burn care, Burns and Journal of Burn Care and Research. STUDY SELECTION Two reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials comparing albumin vs. non-albumin solutions for the acute resuscitation of patients with >20% body surface area involvement. DATA EXTRACTION Reviewers abstracted data independently and assessed methodological quality of the included trials using predefined criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS A random effects model was used to assess mortality. We identified 164 trials of which, 4 trials involving 140 patients met our inclusion criteria. Overall, the methodological quality of the included trials was fair. We did not find a significant benefit of albumin solutions as resuscitation fluid on mortality in burn patients (relative risk (RR) 1.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63-4.08). Total volume of fluid infusion during the phase of resuscitation was lower in patients receiving albumin containing solution -1.00ml/kg/%TBSA (total body surface area) (95% CI, -1.42 to -0.58). CONCLUSION The pooled estimate demonstrated a neutral effect on mortality in burn patients resuscitated acutely with albumin solutions. Due to limited evidence and uncertainty, an adequately powered, high quality trial could be required to assess the impact of albumin solutions on mortality in burn patients.
Albumin in burn shock resuscitation: a meta-analysis of controlled clinical studies
Journal of Burn Care Research. 2016;37((3):):e268-78
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.