Abstract
In response to this uncertainty and the evidence suggesting
that mannitol and hypertonic saline have equivalent
initial effects on intracranial hypertension, the two fluids are
probably used almost interchangeably in current Australian
and New Zealand critical care practice in patients with
refractory intracranial hypertension. However, mannitol has
the potential disadvantages of rebound intracranial hypertension
and intravascular dehydration. In contrast, hypertonic
saline restores intravascular volume, may better
maintain central perfusion, and is not associated with any
rebound effects. Therefore, despite historical preferences,
there is a better rationale for use of hypertonic saline than
there is for mannitol.
What should we do? We believe the answer lies not in
more random practice, but in more research. This is an
important area of ICU research that needs to be tackled
with properly designed double-blind randomised controlled
trials, first aimed at ICP management and then at
changing clinical outcomes. If using saline instead of
albumin resuscitation can change outcome in patients
with traumatic brain injury, it is conceivable that choosing
the correct osmotherapy agent could do the same. We
need to find out.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 94 - 95 |
Number of pages | 2 |
Journal | Critical Care and Resuscitation |
Volume | 11 |
Issue number | 2 |
Publication status | Published - 2009 |