Hypertonic saline in severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Hypertonic saline for traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes mortality and long-term disability among young adults and imposes a notable cost on the healthcare system. In addition to the first physical hit, secondary injury, which is associated with increased intracranial pressure (ICP), is defined as biochemical, cellular, and physiological changes after the physical injury. Mannitol and Hypertonic saline (HTS) are the treatment bases for elevated ICP in TBI. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness of HTS in the management of patients with TBI.

METHODS

This study was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methods and PRISMA statement. A systematic search was performed through six databases in February 2022, to find studies that evaluated the effects of HTS, on increased ICP. Meta-analysis was performed using comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA).

RESULTS

Out of 1321 results, 8 studies were included in the systematic review, and 3 of them were included in the quantitative synthesis. The results of the meta-analysis reached a 35.9% (95% CI 15.0-56.9) reduction in ICP in TBI patients receiving HTS, with no significant risk of publication bias (t-value = 0.38, df = 2, p-value = 0.73). The most common source of bias in our included studies was the transparency of blinding methods for both patients and outcome assessors.

CONCLUSION

HTS can significantly reduce the ICP, which may prevent secondary injury. Also, based on the available evidence, HTS has relatively similar efficacy to Mannitol, which is considered the gold standard therapy for TBI, in boosting patients' neurological condition and reducing mortality rates.

A Brief Review of Bolus Osmotherapy Use for Managing Severe Traumatic Brain Injuries in the Pre-Hospital and Emergency Department Settings

Background: Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) management begins in the pre-hospital setting, but clinicians are left with limited options for stabilisation during retrieval due to time and space constraints, as well as a lack of access to monitoring equipment. Bolus osmotherapy with hypertonic substances is commonly utilised as a temporising measure for life-threatening brain herniation, but much contention persists around its use, largely stemming from a limited evidence base. Method: The authors conducted a brief review of hypertonic substance use in patients with TBI, with a particular focus on studies involving the pre-hospital and emergency department (ED) settings. We aimed to report pragmatic information useful for clinicians involved in the early management of this patient group. Results: We reviewed the literature around the pharmacology of bolus osmotherapy, commercially available agents, potential pitfalls, supporting evidence and guideline recommendations. We further reviewed what the ideal agent is, when it should be administered, dosing and treatment endpoints and/or whether it confers meaningful long-term outcome benefits. Conclusions: There is a limited evidence-based argument in support of the implementation of bolus osmotherapy in the pre-hospital or ED settings for patients who sustain a TBI. However, decades’ worth of positive clinician experiences with osmotherapy for TBI will likely continue to drive its on-going use. Choices regarding osmotherapy will likely continue to be led by local policies, individual patient characteristics and clinician preferences.

An overview of systematic reviews on the pharmacological randomized controlled trials for reducing intracranial pressure after traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND

There is a need for an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) examining randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of intracranial pressure (ICP) post-TBI.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize pharmacological effectiveness in decreasing ICP in SRs with RCTs and evaluate study quality.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases for English SRs through October 2020. Inclusion criteria were SRs with RCTs that examined pharmacological interventions to treat ICP in patients post-TBI. Data extracted were participant characteristics, pharmacological interventions, and ICP outcomes. Study quality was assessed with AMSTAR-2.

RESULTS

Eleven SRs between 2003 and 2020 were included. AMSTAR-2 ratings revealed 3/11 SRs of high quality. Pharmacological interventions included hyperosmolars, neuroprotectives, anesthetics, sedatives, and analgesics. Study samples ranged from 7 to 1282 patients. Hyperosmolar agents and sedatives were beneficial in lowering elevated ICP. High bolus dose opioids had a more deleterious effect on ICP. Neuroprotective agents did not show any effects in ICP management. RCT sample sizes and findings in the SRs varied. A lack of detailed data syntheses was noted. AMSTAR-2 analysis revealed moderate-to-high quality in most SRs. Future SRs may focus on streamlined reporting of dosing and clearer clinical recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

PROSPERO-Registration: CRD42015017355.

Sugar or salt ("SOS"): A protocol for a UK multicentre randomised trial of mannitol and hypertonic saline in severe traumatic brain injury and intracranial hypertension

Hyperosmolar solutions are widely used to treat raised intracranial pressure following severe traumatic brain injury. Although mannitol has historically been the most frequently administered, hypertonic saline solutions are increasingly being used. However, definitive evidence regarding their comparative effectiveness is lacking. The Sugar or Salt Trial is a UK randomised, allocation concealed open label multicentre pragmatic trial designed to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of hypertonic saline compared with mannitol in the management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Patients requiring intensive care unit admission and intracranial pressure monitoring post-traumatic brain injury will be allocated at random to receive equi-osmolar boluses of either mannitol or hypertonic saline following failure of routine first-line measures to control intracranial pressure. The primary outcome for the study will be the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale assessed at six months after randomisation. Results will inform current clinical practice in the routine use of hyperosmolar therapy as well as assess the impact of potential side effects. Pre-planned longer term clinical and cost effectiveness analyses will further inform the use of these treatments.

Hypertonic Saline Versus Mannitol for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

Mannitol and hypertonic saline are widely used to treat raised intracranial pressure (ICP) after traumatic brain injury (TBI), but the clinical superiority of one over the other has not been demonstrated.

METHODS

According to the PRISMA statement, this meta-analysis reports on randomized controlled trials investigating hypertonic saline compared with mannitol in the treatment of elevated ICP following TBI. The protocol for the literature searches (Medline, Embase, Central databases), quality assessment, endpoints (mortality, favorable outcome, brain perfusion parameters), and statistical analysis plan (including a trial sequential analysis) were prospectively specified and registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42017057112).

RESULTS

A total of 12 randomized controlled trials with 464 patients were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Although there was a nonsignificant trend in favor of hypertonic saline, there were no significant differences in mortality between the 2 treatments (relative risk [RR]: 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45, 1.04; P=0.08). There were also no significant differences in favorable neurological outcome between hypertonic saline (HS) and mannitol (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.86, 1.90; P=0.23). There was no difference in ICP at 30 to 60 minutes after treatment (mean difference [MD]: -0.19 mm Hg, 95% CI: -0.54, 0.17; P=0.30), whereas ICP was significantly lower after HS compared with mannitol at 90 to 120 minutes (MD: -2.33 mm Hg, 95% CI: -3.17, -1.50; P<0.00001). Cerebral perfusion pressure was higher between 30 to 60 and 90 to 120 minutes after treatment with HS compared with after treatment with mannitol (MD: 5.48 mm Hg, 95% CI: 4.84, 6.12; P<0.00001 and 9.08 mm Hg, 95% CI: 7.54, 10.62; P<0.00001, respectively). Trial sequential analysis showed that the number of cases was insufficient to produce reliable statements on long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSION

There are indications that HS might be superior to mannitol in the treatment of TBI-related raised ICP. However, there are insufficient data to reach a definitive conclusion, and further studies are warranted.

Hypertonic Saline for Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review of Impact on Neurological Deterioration

Hypertonic saline (HTS) is a commonly administered agent for intracranial pressure (ICP) control in traumatic brain injury (TBI). The literature on its use is mainly in moderate/severe TBI where invasive ICP monitoring is present. The role of HTS in patients with moderate TBI (mTBI) outside of the intensive care unit (ICU) setting remains unclear. The goal of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the available literature on HTS administration in patients with mTBI without ICP monitoring, assessing its impact on outcome and transitions in care. We performed a scoping systematic review of the literature of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, BIOSIS, and the Cochrane Databases from inception to July 31, 2020. We searched for those published articles documenting the administration of HTS in patients with mTBI with recorded functional outcome or transitions in hospital care. A two-step review process was conducted in accordance with methodology outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. There were many studies with combined moderate/severe TBI populations. However, most failed to document subgroup analysis for patients with mTBI. Our search strategy identified only one study that documented the administration of HTS in mTBI in which subgroup analysis for mTBI and outcomes were provided. This retrospective cohort study assessed patients with mTBI who did/did not receive prophylactic HTS, finding that those not receiving HTS demonstrated a deterioration in Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score in the first 48 h. However, the HTS group did demonstrate a trend to longer hospital stay and pneumonia. Our scoping review identified a significant gap in knowledge surrounding the use of HTS for patients with mTBI without invasive ICP monitoring. The limited identified literature suggests prophylactic administration prevents clinical deterioration, although this is based on a single study with data available for mTBI sub-analysis. Further studies on HTS in non-monitored patients with mTBI are required.

Immunomodulatory Effect of Hypertonic Saline Solution in Traumatic Brain-Injured Patients and Intracranial Hypertension

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is often associated with an increase in the intracranial pressure (ICP). This increase in ICP can cross the physiological range and lead to a reduction in cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and the resultant cerebral blood flow (CBF). It is this reduction in the CBF that leads to the secondary damage to the neural parenchyma along with the physical axonal and neuronal damage caused by the mass effect. In certain cases, a surgical intervention may be required to either remove the mass lesion (hematoma of contusion evacuation) or provide more space to the insulted brain to expand (decompressive craniectomy). Whether or not a surgical intervention is performed, all these patients require some form of pharmaceutical antiedema agents to bring down the raised ICP. These agents have been broadly classified as colloids (e.g., mannitol, glycerol, urea) and crystalloids (e.g., hypertonic saline), and have been used since decades. Even though mannitol has been the workhorse for ICP reduction owing to its unique properties, crystalloids have been found to be the preferred agents, especially when long-term use is warranted. The safest and most widely used agent is hypertonic saline in various concentrations. Whatever be the concentration, hypertonic saline has created special interest among physicians owing to its additional property of immunomodulation and neuroprotection. In this review, we summarize and understand the various mechanism by which hypertonic saline exerts its immunomodulatory effects that helps in neuroprotection after TBI.

The impact of hypertonic saline on cerebrovascular reactivity and compensatory reserve in traumatic brain injury: an exploratory analysis

Background

Intravenous hypertonic saline is utilized commonly in critical care for treatment of acute or refractory elevations of intracranial pressure (ICP) in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. Though there is a clear understanding of the general physiological effects of a hypertonic saline solution over long periods of time, smaller epoch effects of hypertonic saline (HTS) have not been thoroughly analyzed. The aim of this study was to perform a direct evaluation of the high-frequency response of HTS on the cerebrovascular physiological responses in TBI.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained adult TBI database for those with archived high-frequency cerebral physiology and available HTS treatment information. We evaluated different epochs of physiology around HTS bolus dosing, comparing pre- with post-HTS. We assessed for changes in slow fluctuations in ICP, pulse amplitude of ICP (AMP), cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), cerebrovascular reactivity (as measured through pressure reactivity index (PRx)), and cerebral compensatory reserve (correlation (R) between AMP (A) and ICP (P)). Comparisons of mean measures and percentage time above clinically relevant thresholds for the physiological parameters were compared pre- and post-HTS using descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U testing. We assessed for subgroups of physiological responses using latent profile analysis (LPA).

Results

Fifteen patients underwent 69 distinct bolus infusions of hypertonic saline. Apart from the well-documented decrease in ICP, there was also a reduction in AMP. The analysis of cerebrovascular reactivity response to HTS solution had two main effects. For patients with grossly impaired cerebrovascular reactivity pre-HTS (PRx > + 0.30), HTS bolus led to improved reactivity. However, for those with intact cerebrovascular reactivity pre-HTS (PRx < 0), HTS bolus demonstrated a trend towards more impaired reactivity. This indicates that HTS has different impacts, dependent on pre-bolus cerebrovascular status. There was no significant change in metrics of cerebral compensatory reserve. LPA failed to demonstrate any subgroups of physiological responses to HTS administration.

Conclusions

The direct decrease in ICP and AMP confirms that a bolus dose of a HTS solution is an effective therapeutic agent for intracranial hypertension. However, in patients with intact autoregulation, hypertonic saline may impair cerebral hemodynamics. These findings regarding cerebrovascular reactivity remain preliminary and require further investigation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00701-020-04579-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effects of hypertonic saline versus mannitol in patients with traumatic brain injury in prehospital, emergency department, and intensive care unit settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intracranial pressure control has long been recognized as an important requirement for patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Hypertonic saline has drawn attention as an alternative to mannitol in this setting. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of hypertonic saline versus mannitol on clinical outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in prehospital, emergency department, and intensive care unit settings by systematically reviewing the literature and synthesizing the evidence from randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Igaku Chuo Zasshi (ICHUSHI) Web database with no date restrictions. We selected randomized controlled trials in which the clinical outcomes of adult patients with traumatic brain injury were compared between hypertonic saline and mannitol strategies. Two investigators independently screened the search results and conducted the data extraction. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were 90-day and 180-day mortality, good neurological outcomes, reduction in intracranial pressure, and serum sodium level. Random effects estimators with weights calculated by the inverse variance method were used to determine the pooled risk ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients from four randomized trials were included, and all the studies were conducted in the intensive care unit. Among 105 patients from three trials that evaluated the primary outcome, 50 patients were assigned to the hypertonic saline group and 55 patients were assigned to the mannitol group. During the observation period, death was observed for 16 patients in the hypertonic saline group (32.0%) and 21 patients in the mannitol group (38.2%). The risks were not significant between the two infusion strategies (pooled risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.37). There were also no significant differences between the two groups in the other secondary outcomes. However, the certainty of the evidence was rated very low for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings revealed no significant difference in the all-cause mortality rates between patients receiving hypertonic saline or mannitol to control intracranial pressure. Further investigation is warranted because we only included a limited number of studies.

Guidelines for the Acute Treatment of Cerebral Edema in Neurocritical Care Patients

BACKGROUND

Acute treatment of cerebral edema and elevated intracranial pressure is a common issue in patients with neurological injury. Practical recommendations regarding selection and monitoring of therapies for initial management of cerebral edema for optimal efficacy and safety are generally lacking. This guideline evaluates the role of hyperosmolar agents (mannitol, HTS), corticosteroids, and selected non-pharmacologic therapies in the acute treatment of cerebral edema. Clinicians must be able to select appropriate therapies for initial cerebral edema management based on available evidence while balancing efficacy and safety.

METHODS

The Neurocritical Care Society recruited experts in neurocritical care, nursing, and pharmacy to create a panel in 2017. The group generated 16 clinical questions related to initial management of cerebral edema in various neurological insults using the PICO format. A research librarian executed a comprehensive literature search through July 2018. The panel screened the identified articles for inclusion related to each specific PICO question and abstracted necessary information for pertinent publications. The panel used GRADE methodology to categorize the quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low based on their confidence that the findings of each publication approximate the true effect of the therapy.

RESULTS

The panel generated recommendations regarding initial management of cerebral edema in neurocritical care patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage, traumatic brain injury, acute ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, bacterial meningitis, and hepatic encephalopathy.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests hyperosmolar therapy may be helpful in reducing ICP elevations or cerebral edema in patients with SAH, TBI, AIS, ICH, and HE, although neurological outcomes do not appear to be affected. Corticosteroids appear to be helpful in reducing cerebral edema in patients with bacterial meningitis, but not ICH. Differences in therapeutic response and safety may exist between HTS and mannitol. The use of these agents in these critical clinical situations merits close monitoring for adverse effects. There is a dire need for high-quality research to better inform clinicians of the best options for individualized care of patients with cerebral edema.

Hyperosmolar therapy for acute brain injury: study protocol for an umbrella review of meta-analyses and an evidence mapping

INTRODUCTION

Acute brain injury is a challenging public health problem worldwide. Elevated intracranial pressure is a common complication after acute brain injury. Hyperosmolar therapy is one of the main therapeutic strategies for the management of intracranial hypertension. This study protocol outlines an umbrella review of meta-analyses which will investigate the benefits and harms of hyperosmolar therapy routinely used for the management of acute brain injury in the intensive care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We will include meta-analyses of primary research studies (eg, randomised controlled trials, observational studies or both) that evaluate one or more hyperosmolar solutions (including hypertonic saline and/or mannitol) for the treatment of adult patients with acute brain injury of any severity. Two researchers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion with a third researcher. Primary outcomes will be mortality and neurological outcomes at discharge. Secondary outcomes will include control of intracranial pressure, cerebral perfusion pressure, length of stay (in hospital an intensive care unit) and any adverse event. Quality of the included meta-analyses will be assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. An overall summary of methods and results will be performed using tabular and graphical approaches and will be supplemented by narrative description. We will analyse whether published meta-analyses present an outline of available evidence (eg, cited, described and discussed any previous meta-analysis). Where objectives from two or more meta-analyses overlap, we will assess the causes of any noted discrepancies between meta-analyses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval will be required. Findings from this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. All data will be deposited in a cross-disciplinary public repository.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019148152.

Resuscitation Strategies for Traumatic Brain Injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality; however, little definitive evidence exists about most clinical management strategies. Here, we highlight important differences between two major guidelines, the 2016 Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines and the Lund Concept, along with recent pre-clinical and clinical data.

RECENT FINDINGS

While intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring has been questioned, the majority of literature demonstrates benefit in severe TBI. The optimal cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and ICP are yet unknown, but likely as important is the concept of ICP burden. The evidence for anti-hypertensive therapy is strengthening. Decompressive craniectomy improves mortality, but at the cost of increased morbidity. Plasma-based resuscitation has demonstrated benefit in multiple pre-clinical TBI studies.

SUMMARY

The management of hemodynamics and intravascular volume are crucial in TBI. Based on recent evidence, ICP monitoring, anti-hypertensive therapy, minimal use of vasopressors/inotropes, and plasma resuscitation may improve outcomes.

Hypertonic saline or mannitol for treating elevated intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Hyperosmolar therapy is regarded as the mainstay for treatment of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) in traumatic brain injury (TBI). This still has been disputed as application of hypertonic saline (HS) or mannitol for treating patients with severe TBI. Thus, this meta-analysis was performed to further compare the advantages and disadvantages of mannitol with HS for treating elevated ICP after TBI. We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Wan Fang Data, VIP Data, SinoMed, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases. Studies were included or not based on the quality assessment by the Jadad scale and selection criteria. Twelve RCTs with 438 patients were enrolled for the meta-analysis. The comparison of HS and mannitol indicated that they were close in field of improving function outcome (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.54, p = 0.258) and reducing intracranial pressure (MD = - 0.16, 95% CI: - 0.59 to 0.27, p = 0.473) and mortality (RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.16, p = 0.216). The pooled relative risk of successful ICP control was 1.06 (95% CI: 1.00 to 1.13, p = 0.044), demonstrating that HS was more effective than mannitol in ICP management. Both serum sodium (WMD = 5.30, 95% CI: 4.37 to 6.22, p < 0.001) and osmolality (WMD = 3.03, 95% CI: 0.18 to 5.88, p = 0.037) were increased after injection of hypertonic saline. The results do not lend a specific recommendation to select hypertonic saline or mannitol as a first-line for the patients with elevated ICP caused by TBI. However, for the refractory intracranial hypertension, hypertonic saline seems to be preferred.

Dutch Prospective Observational Study on Prehospital Treatment of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: The BRAIN-PROTECT Study Protocol

Background: Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is associated with a high mortality rate and those that survive commonly have permanent disability. While there is a broad consensus that appropriate prehospital treatment is crucial for a favorable neurological outcome, evidence to support currently applied treatment strategies is scarce. In particular, the relationship between prehospital treatments and patient outcomes is unclear. The BRAIN-PROTECT study therefore aims to identify prehospital treatment strategies associated with beneficial or detrimental outcomes. Here, we present the study protocol. Study Protocol: BRAIN-PROTECT is the acronym for BRAin INjury: Prehospital Registry of Outcome, Treatments and Epidemiology of Cerebral Trauma. It is a prospective observational study on the prehospital treatment of patients with suspected severe TBI in the Netherlands. Prehospital epidemiology, interventions, medication strategies, and nonmedical factors that may affect outcome are studied. Multivariable regression based modeling will be used to identify confounder-adjusted relationships between these factors and patient outcomes, including mortality at 30 days (primary outcome) or mortality and functional neurological outcome at 1 year (secondary outcomes). Patients in whom severe TBI is suspected during prehospital treatment (Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 8 in combination with a trauma mechanism or clinical findings suggestive of head injury) are identified by all four helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) in the Netherlands. Patients are prospectively followed up in 9 participating trauma centers for up to one year. The manuscript reports in detail the objectives, setting, study design, patient inclusion, and data collection process. Ethical and juridical aspects, statistical considerations, as well as limitations of the study design are discussed. Discussion: Current prehospital treatment of patients with suspected severe TBI is based on marginal evidence, and optimal treatment is basically unknown. The BRAIN-PROTECT study provides an opportunity to evaluate and compare different treatment strategies with respect to patient outcomes. To our knowledge, this study project is the first large-scale prospective prehospital registry of patients with severe TBI that also collects long-term follow-up data and may provide the best available evidence at this time to give useful insights on how prehospital care can be improved.

Pathophysiology and Management of Intracranial Hypertension and Tissular Brain Hypoxia After Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: An Integrative Approach

Monitoring intracranial pressure in comatose patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is considered necessary by most experts. Acute intracranial hypertension (IHT), when severe and sustained, is a life-threatening complication that demands emergency treatment. Yet, secondary anoxic-ischemic injury after brain trauma can occur in the absence of IHT. In such cases, adding other monitoring modalities can alert clinicians when the patient is in a state of energy failure. This article reviews the mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment of IHT and brain hypoxia after TBI, emphasizing the need to develop a physiologically integrative approach to the management of these complex situations.

Treatment options for severe traumatic brain injuries in children: current therapies, challenges, and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) afflicts many children and adults worldwide, resulting in high rates of morbidity and mortality. Recent therapeutic advances have focused on both surgical and medical treatment options, but none have been proven to reduce overall morbidity and mortality in this population. Areas covered: Several emerging therapies are addressed that focus on treating related secondary injuries and other clinical sequelae post-TBI during the acute injury phase (defined by authors as up to four weeks post-injury). Information and data were obtained from a PubMed search of recent literature and through reputable websites (e.g. Centers for Disease Control, ClinicalTrials.gov). Peer-reviewed original articles, review articles, and clinical guidelines were included. Expert commentary: The ongoing challenges related to conducting rigorous clinical trials in TBI have led to largely inconclusive findings regarding emerging beneficial therapies.

Hypertonic saline in critical illness - A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The optimal approach to fluid management in critically ill patients is highly debated. Fluid resuscitation using hypertonic saline was used in the past for more than thirty years, but has recently disappeared from clinical practice. Here we provide an overview on the currently available literature on effects of hypertonic saline infusion for fluid resuscitation in the critically ill.

METHODS

Systematic analysis of reports of clinical trials comparing effects of hypertonic saline as resuscitation fluid to other available crystalloid solutions. A literature search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register (CENTRAL) was conducted to identify suitable studies.

RESULTS

The applied search strategy produced 2284 potential publications. After eliminating doubles, 855 titles and abstracts were screened and 40 references retrieved for full text analysis. At total of 25 scientific studies meet the prespecified inclusion criteria for this study.

CONCLUSION

Fluid resuscitation using hypertonic saline results in volume expansion and less total infusion volume. This may be of interest in oedematous patients with intravascular volume depletion. When such strategies are employed, renal effects may differ markedly according to prior intravascular volume status. Hypertonic saline induced changes in serum osmolality and electrolytes return to baseline within a limited period in time. Sparse evidence indicates that resuscitation with hypertonic saline results in less perioperative complications, ICU days and mortality in selected patients. In conclusion, the use of hypertonic saline may have beneficial features in selected critically ill patients when carefully chosen. Further clinical studies assessing relevant clinical outcomes are warranted.

Clinical aspects of changes in water and sodium homeostasis in the elderly

The population of elderly individuals is increasing worldwide. With aging, various hormonal and kidney changes occur, both affecting water homeostasis. Aging is a risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) and many features of CKD are reproduced in the aging kidney. Dehydration and hyperosmolarity can be triggered by diminished thirst perception in this population. Elderly with dementia are especially susceptible to abnormalities of their electrolyte and body water homeostasis and should be (re-)assessed for polypharmacy. Hypo- and hypernatremia can be life threatening and should be diagnosed and treated promptly, following current practice guidelines. In severe cases of acute symptomatic hyponatremia, a rapid bolus of 100 to 150 ml of intravenous 3% hypertonic saline is appropriate to avert catastrophic outcomes; for asymptomatic hyponatremia, a very gradual correction is preferred. In summary, the body sodium (Na+) balance is regulated by a complex interplay of environmental and individual factors. In this review, we attempt to provide an overview on this topic, including dehydration, hyponatremia, hypernatremia, age-related kidney changes, water and sodium balance, and age-related changes in the vasopressin and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system.

Use of intravenous fluids/solutions: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE

Intravenous fluids are broadly categorized into colloids and crystalloids. The aim of this review is to present under a clinical point of view the characteristics of intravenous fluids that make them more or less appropriate either for maintaining hydration when enteral intake is contraindicated or for treating hypovolemia.

METHODS

We considered randomized trials and meta-analyses as well as narrative reviews evaluating the effects of colloids or crystalloids in patients with hypovolemia or as maintenance fluids published in the PubMed and Cochrane databases.

RESULTS

Clinical studies have not shown a greater clinical benefit of albumin solutions compared with crystalloid solutions. Furthermore, albumin and colloid solutions may impair renal function, while there is no evidence that the administration of colloids reduces the risk of death compared with resuscitation with crystalloids in patients with trauma, burns or following surgery. Among crystalloids, normal saline is associated with the development of hyperchloremia-induced impairment of kidney function and metabolic acidosis. On the other hand, the other commonly used crystalloid solution, the Ringer's Lactate, has certain indications and contraindications. These matters, along with the basic principles of the administration of potassium chloride and bicarbonate, are meticulously discussed in the review.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous fluids should be dealt with as drugs, as they have specific clinical indications, contraindications and adverse effects.