• C M Dunham, H Belzberg, R Lyles, L Weireter, D Skurdal, G Sullivan, T Esposito, and M Namini.
• Shock Trauma Center, Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems, Baltimore 21201-1595.
• Resuscitation. 1991 Apr 1;21(2-3):207-27.

AbstractThe rapid infusion system (RIS), which can deliver fluids/blood products rapidly at precise rates and normothermic conditions, was compared with conventional fluid administration (CFA) in a randomized study of 36 hypovolemic trauma patients. Admission stratification criteria of the groups were similar relative to age, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), Injury Severity Score (ISS) and plasma lactate. Despite the lack of difference in blood loss between the 24-h survivors of the two groups, the CFA group required greater total fluids (23.6/20.21), red blood cells (5.5/4.61), fresh frozen plasma (FFP) (2.8/1.91), platelets (523/204 ml), and crystalloids (12.9/10.61). Lactate levels were lower in the RIS group at virtually all times from hours 1 to 24 (4.3/5.3 mM/l, t-value = 3.3, DF = 279, P = 0.001). Post-admission hypothermia was greater in the CFA group at all times during the first 24 h (35.2/36.4 degrees C, t-value = 5.6, DF = 250, P = 0.001). The mean partial thromboplastin time was significantly higher in the CFA group (47.3/35.1 s, t-value = 3.1, DF = 279, P = 0.002). The PTT and PT were related to the degree of lactic acidosis (P = 0.0001) and hypothermia (P = 0.001) but not to the amount of FFP given (P = 0.14). The hospital costs, days in the ICU, and days on the ventilator were greater for the CFA group, as was the incidence of pneumonia (0/11 vs. 6/17; P = 0.03). Hypovolemic trauma patients resuscitated with the RIS needed fewer fluid/blood products and had less coagulopathy; more rapid resolution of hypoperfusion acidosis; better temperature preservation; and fewer hospital complications than those resuscitated with conventional methods of fluid/blood product administration.

12 keywords...

hide…