We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Acetate- vs lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions: Protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2021 January
BACKGROUND: Buffered crystalloid solutions are increasingly recommended as first-line resuscitation fluids. However, guidelines do not distinguish between different types of buffered solutions. The aim of the outlined systematic review is to summarize and assess the effects of acetate- vs lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions on patient-important outcomes.
METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis comparing the use of acetate- vs lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions in hospitalized patients. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Epistemonikos for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations set by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The risk of systematic errors (bias) and random errors will be assessed, and the overall quality of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
DISCUSSION: The outlined systematic review will provide important data on how patient-important outcomes are affected by intravenous administration of acetate- vs lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions in hospitalized patients.
METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis comparing the use of acetate- vs lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions in hospitalized patients. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Epistemonikos for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations set by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The risk of systematic errors (bias) and random errors will be assessed, and the overall quality of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
DISCUSSION: The outlined systematic review will provide important data on how patient-important outcomes are affected by intravenous administration of acetate- vs lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions in hospitalized patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app