Comparison of Emergency Resuscitation with Colloids and Crystalloids

Abstract

Clinical management is exceedingly difficult to evaluate in emergency patients because resuscitation is often chaotic, disorderly, and frantic. Resuscitation depends upon many factors: the primary illness or injury, the amount of blood and fluid losses, the patient's age, the prior state of health, the associated medical conditions, the time delay in instituting therapy, the volume and rate of fluids administered, and, finally, the choice of fluids given. Although it is difficult to control the effects of these complex interrelated factors, their influence may be evaluated by stratifying patients and then comparing the direct effects and outcome measures within each stratum.There has been persistent controversy over the relative merits of crystalloids and colloids in fluid resuscitation. We studied reviews of fluid management of all hypotensive patients seen in the adult surgical section of the Emergency Department (ED) during a 2½ year period, to compare the conventional crystalloid resuscitation which had been standard for this busy university-run county hospital with a fluid management protocol consisting of about 1/4 A colloids depending on age, cardiac history, and CVP.