Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Rather than fulminating, seek to answer the questions raised
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Goodness, what a reaction. You would think that the Cochrane Injuries Group had really gone too far with its systematic reviews of the outcomes in patients treated with colloid solutions and human albumin. 1 2 Worse, the BMJ has colluded in publicising this dangerously subversive material. One couldn't miss the incandescent letters that these rather routine, workmanlike reviews have elicited (p 882). 3 4 It's as though they had desecrated Osler's grave.
So what is going on here? Scepticism about most uses of albumin is not
new5 and is reflected in clinical guidance in the United
Kingdom.6 The new factor is that a group that is expert in
the business of finding and sifting clinical evidence has revisited
this aspect of the crystalloid v colloid argument that
has been grumbling on since the Vietnam war. The authors are not
clinical experts in emergency medicine, burns, or intensive care and
don't claim to be. All