Impact of intravascular volume replacement and transfusion on outcome: Where are we now?

Intravenous fluid administration is often required to counteract haemodynamic instability during emergency and elective surgeries, as well as in the intensive care unit. However, the best type and the amount of fluid required are controversial. A recent meta-analysis suggested that there is no difference among different types of colloids on outcome. Furthermore, colloids and crystalloids seem to be comparable in terms of efficiency in reverting haemodynamic instability, as well as morbidity and mortality. The interpretation of the results of different randomised controlled trials is somewhat difficult – the context must be always kept in mind. For example, results may differ in septic as compared to non-septic patient populations. Another important aspect concerns the effects on the macro- versus microcirculation. More recent studies emphasise that the microcirculation has to be taken into account when studying and interpreting the interaction between fluid therapy and the underlying disease. Nevertheless, the macrocirculation and clinical parameters have to be considered as well. Given that red blood cells remain the most important oxygen carriers, recent evidence regarding blood age may stimulate new studies according to the actual range for blood storage. Artificial oxygen carriers may play a role in specific situations, where the transfusion is indicated but the access to blood is problematic, but there is doubt that they may replace blood transfusion.