The Combination of Parkland Formula, Using Normal Saline, with Muir &Barclay Formula for Fluid Resuscitation in the Initial Burn Shock Period

• 作者: Ali Saleem Mehdi C. Thomas Gihan Adly Latif Medhat Emil Habib Said Al-Busaidi
• 来源期刊: 现代整形外科(英文)
• 学科: 医学
• 关键词: Normal SALINE INTRAVENOUS RESUSCITATION Shock PERIOD BURN
• 年，卷（期）: xdzxwkyw_2013,（4）
• 页码范围: 142-149
• 页数: 8页
• 分类号: R73

摘要

Objectives: Evaluation of the effects of withholding plasma during the initial part of the burn shock period (the shock period in the study is estimated as the first 36 hours following the burns) when it will be lost into the interstitial tissues through the permeable capillaries. During that time crystalloids are administered. Another objective is to evaluate the effect of administering normal saline as the crystalloid resuscitation fluid during the initial part of the shock period. Design: A Retrospective 4 years study compares the use of normal saline as the resuscitative intravenous fluid during the first 12 hours post burns followed by intravenous 5% Purified Plasma Protein Fraction (PPPF) during the rest of the shock period i.e. the remaining 24 hours, with the use of the PPPF throughout the burns shock period according to Muir and Barclay formula. Setting: The Plastic Surgery Department and the Department of Laboratory, Directorate General of Khoula Tertiary Hospital, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. Patients and Methods: The study included 2 groups of patients;Group A: Patients who received 5% Plasma (Human PPPF) throughout the shock period and Group B: Patients who received crystalloids in the form of normal saline during the first 12 hours post burn followed by plasma for the next 24 hours. Monitoring of the patients in both groups was done by using clinical signs of pulse, blood pressure, temperature and urine output and by using laboratory investigations in the form of the haematocrit value, sodium, potassium, chloride, total proteins and albumin levels in the blood at the time of admission and at the end of the shock period. Results: 140 patients were included in the study;64 in Group A and 76 in Group B. There was no mortality and the vital signs were maintained during the shock period in both groups. The mean values of urine output were nearer to the normal level in Group B compared to Group A. The same was observed regarding the Haematocrit value. In both groups the mean values showed no hypoproteinaemi