Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Physiological response to fluid resuscitation with Ringer Lactate versus Plasmalyte in critically ill burn patients.

Solohaja Faniaha Dimby 1, 2 Maïté Chaussard 3 François Dépret 4 Oriane Saint‐aubin Mourad Benyamina 5 Maxime Coutrot Marion Jully Haikel Oueslati 6 Alexandre Fratani Alexandru Cupaciu Alicia Poniard Karim Asehnoune 7 Alexandre Mebazaa 2 Pascal Houzé 8 Matthieu Legrand 2, 9
1 SAMM - Statistique, Analyse et Modélisation Multidisciplinaire (SAmos-Marin Mersenne)
2 Groupe Hospitalier Saint Louis - Lariboisière - Fernand Widal [Paris]
3 Service d'Anesthésie et Soins Intensifs
4 F-CRIN, INICRCT network, Paris
5 Service d’anesthésie-réanimation [AP-HP Hôpital Saint-Louis]
6 Hôpital Saint-Louis
7 EA 3826 - Thérapeutiques cliniques et expérimentales des infections (EA 3826)
8 UTCBS - UM 4 (UMR 8258 / U1022) - Unité de Technologies Chimiques et Biologiques pour la Santé
9 Perioperative Clinical Research Core, Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, UCSF Medical Center at Mt Zion
Abstract : The metabolic consequences in vivo of various balanced solutions are poorly known in critically ill patients. The main objective of this study was to describe the metabolic consequences of Plasmalyte® versus Ringer lactate (RL) in critically ill burn patients, with a special focus on the plasma clearance of buffer anions (i.e. gluconate, acetate and lactate). We conducted a randomized trial between August 2017 and October 2018 in a tertiary teaching hospital in Paris, France. Patients with burn total body surface area >30% were randomized to receive Plasmalyte® or RL. The primary endpoint was the base excess (BE) 24 hours after inclusion. The secondary endpoints were acetate, gluconate and lactate plasma concentration, the strong ion difference (SID). Twenty-eight patients were randomized. Twenty-four hours after inclusion, plasma BE was not significantly different in the Plasmalyte® and RL groups (-0.9 [CI95% -1.8-0.9] vs -2.1 [CI95% -4.6-0.6] mmol/L respectively, p=0.26). Plasma gluconate concentration was higher in the Plasmalyte® group (p<0.001) with a maximum level of 1.86 (CI95% 0.98-4.0) mmol/L vs 0 (IC95% 0-0.15) mmol/L. Plasma acetate and lactate were not significantly different. Ionized calcium level was lower in the Plasmalyte® group (p=0.002). Hemodynamics did not differ between groups. To conclude, alkalinizing effect of Plasmalyte® was less important than expected with no difference in base excess compared to RL, in part due to gluconate accumulation. Acetate and lactate did not significantly accumulate. Plasmalyte® led to significantly lower ionized calcium levels.
Document type :
Journal articles
Complete list of metadata
https://hal-paris1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02498198
Contributor : Solohaja Faniaha Dimby Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - 11:28:46 AM
Last modification on : Tuesday, January 4, 2022 - 6:48:24 AM

Identifiers

  • HAL Id : hal-02498198, version 1

Collections

UNIV-PARIS1 | ENSCP | SAMM | SAMOS | UNIV-NANTES | PARISTECH | CNRS | UNIV-PARIS | UP-SANTE | PSL | UTCBS | INC-CNRS

Citation

Solohaja Faniaha Dimby, Maïté Chaussard, François Dépret, Oriane Saint‐aubin, Mourad Benyamina, et al.. Physiological response to fluid resuscitation with Ringer Lactate versus Plasmalyte in critically ill burn patients.. Journal of Applied Physiology, American Physiological Society, 2020. ⟨hal-02498198⟩

Export

BibTeX TEI DC DCterms EndNote

Share

Metrics

Les métriques sont temporairement indisponibles