Albumin
22/10/10
SP Notes
- colloid solution
- 4, 10, 20%
- use in the critically unwell = controversial
- uses:
-> volume replacement (SAFE showed that it is equivalent to N/S)
-> hypoalbuminaemia (cirrhosis, SBP -> reduces mortality and renal failure)
PREPARATION
- pooled solution
- by-product of whole blood fractionation
ARGUMENTS AGAINST
- possible infection transmission
- possible allergic reactions
- very expensive (most expensive colloid) -> unable to be used in developing countries
ARGUMENTS FOR
- rates of infection transmission extremely low
- free in Australia
EVIDENCE
Cochrane meta-analysis (1998)
- 24 trials
- 1419 patients
- albumin vs N/S in hypovolaemia, burns and hypovolaemia
-> increased mortality (6% increase in absolute risk of death)
Meta-analysis (2001)
- 55 trials
- 3504 patients
-> no significant increase in mortality
Martin (CCM, 2002)
- RCT demonstrating improved mortality with albumin through improved oxygenation to hypo-proteinaemic patients with ALI.
Sort (NEJM, 2002)
- RCT showing improved mortality in patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis.
SAFE trial (NEJM, 2004)
- MRCT
- n = 6997
- primary end points: 28 day mortality
- powered to detect a 3% absolute reduction in mortality
- confirmed that 4% albumin was ‘safe’ when compared to normal saline in the critically unwell requiring fluid resuscitation.
- post hoc analysis showed that patients with TBI and major trauma had worse outcomes with albumin and patients with septic shock tended to better with albumin.
- ARDS patients do better with albumin.
Martin (CCM, 2005)
- patients who are hypoproteinaemic with ARDS when given albumin + frusemide vs frusemide alone
-> improved oxygenation
-> improved haemodynamic stability
Myburgh, J. A. and Finfer, S. (2009) “Albumin is a Blood Product too – is it safe for all patients?” Critical Care and Resuscitation, 11:67-70
- SAFE as compared to N/S (except in TBI)
- possible trend to decreased mortality in severe sepsis (needs further investigation)
- hypoalbuminaemia is associated with increased mortality -> volume resuscitation with albumin doesn’t reduce
-> mortality
-> duration of ICU stay
-> duration of mechanical ventilation
-> duration of RRT
- no substantive evidence to justify use of hyperoncotic albumin although we it does increase intravascular volume from its oncotic effect
- expensive
MY APPROACH
- use in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis
- can use in resuscitation of ICU patients (except those with TBI)
- use in ARDS in patients with low albumin with frusemide
- may be associated with benefit in severe sepsis (awaiting further studies)
- I don’t use to correct hypoalbuminaemia
- don’t use hyperoncotic albumin
- recognize expense and increase transfusion related risks
Jeremy Fernando (2011)