4.4 Review

Ringer's lactate versus normal saline in acute pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE DISEASES
Volume 19, Issue 6, Pages 335-341

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1751-2980.12606

Keywords

acute necrotizing pancreatitis; normal saline; pancreatitis; Ringer's lactate; systemic inflammatory response syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVEAggressive i.v. hydration with crystalloids is the first step in managing acute pancreatitis (AP) and is associated with improved survival. Guidelines about the choice of crystalloids to use are unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis was aimed to discern whether the choice of fluids in managing pancreatitis was associated with patients' outcomes. METHODSA comprehensive literature review was conducted by searching the Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Scholar databases to December 2017 to identify all studies that compared normal saline (NS) with Ringer's lactate (RL) for managing AP. The characteristics of the participants, outcome measurements (including mortality, the development of systemic inflammatory response syndrome [SIRS] on admission and at 24h, and pancreatic necrosis) were analyzed. RESULTSFive studies (three randomized controlled trials and two retrospective cohort studies) with 428 patients were included in this analysis. Mortality trended lower in the RL group but this was not statistically significant (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.28-1.29, P=0.20). Patients in the RL group had significantly decreased odds of developing SIRS at 24h (pooled OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15-0.98, P=0.05). CONCLUSIONSRL has anti-inflammatory effects and is associated with decreased odds of persistent SIRS at 24h, which is a marker of severe disease in AP patients. Although mortality trended lower in the RL group this did not achieve statistical significance and hence larger randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate this association.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available