Karen Louise Ellekjaer, Praleene Sivapalan, Sheila N Myatra, Lasse Grønningsæter, Johanna Hästbacka, Paul J Young, Andrew J Boyle, Marlies Ostermann, Carmen A Pfortmueller, Ieva Jovaišienė, Jan De Waele, Annika Reintam Blaser, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Ashish K Khanna, Yaseen M Arabi, Tomoko Fujii, Eric Keus, Mervyn Mer, Fayez Alshamsi, Maria Cronhjort, Anders Perner, Morten H Møller
{"title":"静脉输液治疗中醋酸盐与乳酸盐缓冲晶体溶液的偏好和态度——一项国际调查。","authors":"Karen Louise Ellekjaer, Praleene Sivapalan, Sheila N Myatra, Lasse Grønningsæter, Johanna Hästbacka, Paul J Young, Andrew J Boyle, Marlies Ostermann, Carmen A Pfortmueller, Ieva Jovaišienė, Jan De Waele, Annika Reintam Blaser, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Ashish K Khanna, Yaseen M Arabi, Tomoko Fujii, Eric Keus, Mervyn Mer, Fayez Alshamsi, Maria Cronhjort, Anders Perner, Morten H Møller","doi":"10.1111/aas.14553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical practice guidelines recommend use of buffered crystalloid solutions in critically ill patients but do not distinguish between solutions based on different buffering anions, that is, acetate- versus lactate-buffered solutions. We therefore surveyed relevant physicians about their preferences and attitudes toward each solution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an international online survey of anesthesiologists (within perioperative care) and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. The survey comprised 13 questions on respondents' attitudes and preferences regarding the use of acetate- and/or lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions, including their opinions on a potential clinical trial comparing these solutions and the clinical importance of such a trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1321 respondents participated, with a response rate of 34%, ranging from 14% to 96% across 18 countries. Most surveyed physicians reported using buffered crystalloid solutions \"very often\" (76%) or \"often\" (16%). Availability of acetate- and lactate-buffered solutions varied, as 35% of respondents reported having both types available, 35% reported having only acetate-, and 24% reported having only lactate-buffered solutions available. Most respondents (87%) would support a randomized trial in adult emergency surgical patients and ICU patients comparing an acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solution. The median rating of the clinical importance of this question was 5 (interquartile range 4-6) on a scale from 1 to 9.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this international survey, the reported use of buffered crystalloid solutions was high. Availability of the different solutions varied widely. The support for a potential randomized trial was high, with the clinical importance rated important but not critical by most respondents.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":"69 1","pages":"e14553"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences and attitudes on acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions for intravenous fluid therapy-An international survey.\",\"authors\":\"Karen Louise Ellekjaer, Praleene Sivapalan, Sheila N Myatra, Lasse Grønningsæter, Johanna Hästbacka, Paul J Young, Andrew J Boyle, Marlies Ostermann, Carmen A Pfortmueller, Ieva Jovaišienė, Jan De Waele, Annika Reintam Blaser, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Ashish K Khanna, Yaseen M Arabi, Tomoko Fujii, Eric Keus, Mervyn Mer, Fayez Alshamsi, Maria Cronhjort, Anders Perner, Morten H Møller\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14553\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical practice guidelines recommend use of buffered crystalloid solutions in critically ill patients but do not distinguish between solutions based on different buffering anions, that is, acetate- versus lactate-buffered solutions. We therefore surveyed relevant physicians about their preferences and attitudes toward each solution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an international online survey of anesthesiologists (within perioperative care) and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. The survey comprised 13 questions on respondents' attitudes and preferences regarding the use of acetate- and/or lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions, including their opinions on a potential clinical trial comparing these solutions and the clinical importance of such a trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1321 respondents participated, with a response rate of 34%, ranging from 14% to 96% across 18 countries. Most surveyed physicians reported using buffered crystalloid solutions \\\"very often\\\" (76%) or \\\"often\\\" (16%). Availability of acetate- and lactate-buffered solutions varied, as 35% of respondents reported having both types available, 35% reported having only acetate-, and 24% reported having only lactate-buffered solutions available. Most respondents (87%) would support a randomized trial in adult emergency surgical patients and ICU patients comparing an acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solution. The median rating of the clinical importance of this question was 5 (interquartile range 4-6) on a scale from 1 to 9.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this international survey, the reported use of buffered crystalloid solutions was high. Availability of the different solutions varied widely. The support for a potential randomized trial was high, with the clinical importance rated important but not critical by most respondents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"e14553\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14553\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14553","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Preferences and attitudes on acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions for intravenous fluid therapy-An international survey.
Background: Clinical practice guidelines recommend use of buffered crystalloid solutions in critically ill patients but do not distinguish between solutions based on different buffering anions, that is, acetate- versus lactate-buffered solutions. We therefore surveyed relevant physicians about their preferences and attitudes toward each solution.
Methods: We conducted an international online survey of anesthesiologists (within perioperative care) and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. The survey comprised 13 questions on respondents' attitudes and preferences regarding the use of acetate- and/or lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions, including their opinions on a potential clinical trial comparing these solutions and the clinical importance of such a trial.
Results: A total of 1321 respondents participated, with a response rate of 34%, ranging from 14% to 96% across 18 countries. Most surveyed physicians reported using buffered crystalloid solutions "very often" (76%) or "often" (16%). Availability of acetate- and lactate-buffered solutions varied, as 35% of respondents reported having both types available, 35% reported having only acetate-, and 24% reported having only lactate-buffered solutions available. Most respondents (87%) would support a randomized trial in adult emergency surgical patients and ICU patients comparing an acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solution. The median rating of the clinical importance of this question was 5 (interquartile range 4-6) on a scale from 1 to 9.
Conclusions: In this international survey, the reported use of buffered crystalloid solutions was high. Availability of the different solutions varied widely. The support for a potential randomized trial was high, with the clinical importance rated important but not critical by most respondents.
期刊介绍:
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.