Il y a-t-il une place pour le sérum salé hypertonique dans les états septiques graves ?

The Harmful Effects of Hypertonic Sodium Lactate Administration in Hyperdynamic Septic Shock

Hypertonic sodium lactate (HTL) expands intravascular volume and may provide an alternative substrate for cellular metabolism in sepsis. We compared the effects of HTL, hypertonic saline (HTS), 0.9% ("normal") saline (NS) and Ringer's lactate (RL) on hemodynamics, sublingual and renal microcirculation, renal, mesenteric and brain perfusion, renal and cerebral metabolism, and survival in anesthetized, mechanically ventilated, adult female sheep. Animals (7 in each group) were randomized to receive a bolus (over 15-min) of 3 mL/kg 0.5 M HTL, 3 mL/kg 3% HTS, 10.8 mL/kg NS, or 10.8 mL/kg RL at 2, 6, and 10 h after induction of fecal peritonitis, followed by 2-h infusions of 1 mL/kg/h (HTL/HTS groups) or 3.6 mL/kg/h (NS/RL groups). Animals also received RL and hydroxyethyl starch (ratio 1:1) titrated to maintain pulmonary artery occlusion pressure at baseline levels throughout the experiment. Animals were observed until their spontaneous death. Fluid balance was lower in the HTL and HTS groups than in the other groups from 4 h. Hemodynamic variables were similar among groups during the first 12 h, but thereafter the HTL group had more pronounced decreases in blood pressure and cardiac function. Sublingual and renal microcirculatory abnormalities occurred earlier in the HTL group. Kidney and brain perfusion decreased more rapidly in the HTL group. Median survival times were significantly shorter in the HTL (17 h) and NS (16 h) groups than in the HTS (22 h) or RL (20 h) groups (P = 0.0029). In conclusion, in an ovine model of septic shock, administration of HTL was associated with earlier onset impaired tissue perfusion and shorter survival time. These observations raise concerns about use of HTL in septic shock.

Fluid resuscitation management in patients with burns: update

Since 1968, when Baxter and Shires developed the Parkland formula, little progress has been made in the field of fluid therapy for burn resuscitation, despite advances in haemodynamic monitoring, establishment of the 'goal-directed therapy' concept, and the development of new colloid and crystalloid solutions. Burn patients receive a larger amount of fluids in the first hours than any other trauma patients. Initial resuscitation is based on crystalloids because of the increased capillary permeability occurring during the first 24 h. After that time, some colloids, but not all, are accepted. Since the emergence of the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee alert from the European Medicines Agency concerning hydroxyethyl starches, solutions containing this component are not recommended for burns. But the question is: what do we really know about fluid resuscitation in burns? To provide an answer, we carried out a non-systematic review to clarify how to quantify the amount of fluids needed, what the current evidence says about the available solutions, and which solution is the most appropriate for burn patients based on the available knowledge.