Elsevier

Burns

Volume 35, Issue 1, February 2009, Pages 4-14
Burns

Review
Burn resuscitation

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2008.03.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Current guidelines outlining the resuscitation of severely burned patients, in the United States, were developed over 30 years ago. Unfortunately, clinical burn resuscitation has not advanced significantly since that time despite ongoing research efforts. Many formulas exist and have been developed with the intention of providing appropriate, more precise fluid resuscitation with decreased morbidity as compared to the current standards, such as the Parkland and modified Brooke formulas. The aim of this review was to outline the evolution of burn resuscitation, while closely analyzing current worldwide guidelines, adjuncts to resuscitation, as well as addressing future goals.

Introduction

Resuscitation after severe burn, specifically in the first 24 h after injury, has been and remains a taxing assignment for all burn care providers, regardless of level of training. Accepted guidelines (Parkland and modified Brooke formulas) provide a foundation for focused resuscitation boundaries, and remain the mainstay of what is taught about initial resuscitation around the world, from first responders to intensivists and trauma surgeons. The large difference in recommended total fluid between these accepted formulas of resuscitation, exemplifies the ongoing controversies that exist in applying appropriate therapy [1], [2], [3]. Many studies exist that examine alterations or adjustments in resuscitation protocols that may lead to improved outcomes, however, none are definitive nor have replaced the tried and true standards. The fact remains that these guidelines, even if followed closely, do not always insure a smooth resuscitation, and under-resuscitation and over-resuscitation after severe burn and associated morbidity continue to plague providers and patients despite any advances in therapy [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. This can be related, to some extent, to the difficulty in implementing the Parkland or Brooke formulas during signs of physiologic decompensation such as hypotension or systemic acidosis. Often, this leads to high infusion rates in an attempt to augment cardiac preload that may or may not be effective, or in fact may be harmful. Also, this notion leads to a high rate of non-compliance with these formulas by many inexperienced providers.

Many very important advances in burn resuscitation were made over the last 60 years, although very little of significance has developed since the 1960s and 1970s when Baxter and Pruitt focused research efforts in burn resuscitation and proposed the Parkland and modified Brooke formulas, respectively [9]. Many questions remain unanswered and future considerations are plentiful in this difficult arena. The goal of this article is to review burn resuscitation evolution, understand how we have arrived at today's guidelines, and reiterate the questions that continue to befuddle and should be addressed in future studies.

Section snippets

History

Burn resuscitation studies date back to the early 20th century with Haldor Sneve's description of burn treatments in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 1905 [10]. Sneve proposed methods of preventing shock after severe burn by the administration of salt solutions to severely burned patients by various modalities. These included solution administration through oral ingestion, clysis, enemas, and intravenous infusion. He also described many important concepts regarding skin

The Parkland formula

The development of the Parkland formula in 1968, a crystalloid only formula by Baxter and Shires, stemmed from elucidation of important concepts in burn physiology from their studies on fluid shifts between compartments seen after severe burn [33]. Although these data originated the most widely used burn resuscitation formula today, issues arise after careful review of the landmark article proposing the Parkland formula. The publication describes several elegant experiments, beginning with a

The modified Brooke formula

The original Brooke formula proposed by Dr. Artz at the Army Burn Center was composed of both crystalloid and colloid fluids, as this was felt to be important for the adequate resuscitation of burn patients at that time [21]. As Moyer in the 1960s questioned the role of colloids in resuscitation regiments, he realized that patients tolerated infusions of lactated Ringers’ alone at doses sufficient to keep urine output greater than 50 cm3/h [22]. Importantly he realized that the volumes his

Muir–Barclay formula

In 1974, two British surgeons, Muir and Barclay, published their experiences and recommendations regarding appropriate burn treatment. In their review of resuscitation guidelines from across the globe, they took issue with the most recent recommendations of their time as deficient in addressing the constant need for re-evaluation of the fluid resuscitation protocol in burned patients in order to prevent shock and maintain normal end organ blood flow [39]. Muir and Barclay described how

Other considerations for effective resuscitation

As is seen, absolute consensus on resuscitation formulae has not been reached. The inherent challenges faced by providers caring for severely burned casualties during the initial resuscitation period have been described previously. In November 2005, the USAISR implemented a military-wide burn resuscitation guideline that was developed along with a burn flow sheet, which required the documentation of the initial 24 h resuscitation for all severely burned casualties [40]. We found that a lower

Current effectiveness of accepted guidelines

In most places, two formulas are accepted as guidelines for the resuscitation of severely burned patients, the Parkland and modified Brooke formulas. Burn care providers of all specialties are trained in the use of these formulas in order to help prevent the onset of burn shock prior to the patient's arrival in a burn centre with experienced burn staff. Unfortunately, in the “heat of the moment”, inexperienced first responders as well as many higher level emergency care physicians fail to have

Future considerations

The reality of burn resuscitation evolution is that our guidelines have been in place for 40 years with no significant changes despite the findings of continued complications during resuscitation [9]. Complications remain possibly as result of overzealous over-resuscitation, irresponsible under-resuscitation, or simply the lack of recall for complex formulas. The formula developed in the 1960s and 1970s was designed for the technology and monitoring of the time. Urine output was generally not

Summation

The resuscitation of severely burned patients has clearly evolved over the last century, with a lull in significant progress since the 1970s, at the expense of the patient in our opinion. The guidelines used today were developed 40 years ago, yet remain the mainstay of current initial fluid therapy despite ongoing research. Preventing complications of over- or under-resuscitation still confounds burn providers as no recent advances have been made in this arena as well. As we continue to

Conflict of interest

None.

References (66)

  • M.S. O’Mara et al.

    A prospective, randomized evaluation of intra-abdominal pressures with crystalloid and colloid resuscitation in burn patients

    J Trauma

    (2005)
  • D.G. Greenhalgh

    Burn resuscitation

    J Burn Care Res

    (2007)
  • H. Sneve

    The treatment of burns and skin grafting

    JAMA

    (1905)
  • B.A. Pruitt

    Centennial changes in surgical care and research

    Ann Surg

    (2000)
  • A.M. Fauntleroy

    The surgical lessons of the European war

    Ann Surg

    (1916)
  • F.P. Underhill

    The significance of anhydremia in extensive surface burn

    JAMA

    (1930)
  • A. Blalock

    Experimental shock. The importance of the local loss of fluid in the production of the low blood pressure after burn

    Arch Surg

    (1931)
  • D.A.K. Black

    Treatment of burn shock with plasma and serum

    Br Med J

    (1940)
  • J.R. Elkinton et al.

    Plasma transfusion in the treatment of the fluid shift in severe burns

    Ann Surg

    (1940)
  • H.N. Harkins et al.

    Plasma therapy in severe burns

    Surg Gynecol Obstet

    (1942)
  • National Research Council (US) Committee on Surgery

    Burns, shock, wound healing and vascular injuries/prepared under the auspices of the Committee on Surgery of the Division of Medical Sciences of the National Research Council

    (1943)
  • O. Cope et al.

    The redistribution of body water and the fluid therapy of the burned patient

    Ann Surg

    (1947)
  • E.I. Evans et al.

    Fluid and electrolyte requirements in severe burns

    Ann Surg

    (1952)
  • C.P. Artz et al.

    The burn problem

  • C.A. Moyer et al.

    Burn shock and extravascular sodium: treatment with Ringer's solution with lactate

    Arch Surg

    (1965)
  • C.R. Baxter

    Fluid volume and electrolyte changes in the early post-burn period

    Clin Plast Surg

    (1974)
  • B.A. Pruitt et al.

    Hemodynamic changes in the early postburn patient: the influence of fluid administration and of a vasodilator (hydralazine)

    J Trauma

    (1971)
  • W.W. Monafo

    The treatment of burn shock by the intravenous and oral administration of hypertonic lactated saline solution

    J Trauma

    (1970)
  • J. Oda et al.

    Hypertonic lactated saline resuscitation reduces the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome in severely burned patients

    J Trauma

    (2006)
  • P.P. Huang et al.

    Hypertonic sodium resuscitation is associated with renal failure and death

    Ann Surg

    (1995)
  • H. Onarheim et al.

    Effectiveness of hypertonic saline-dextran 70 for initial fluid resuscitation of major burns

    J Trauma

    (1990)
  • A.B. Cooper et al.

    Five percent albumin for adult burn shock resuscitation: lack of effect on daily multiple organ dysfunction score

    Transfusion

    (2006)
  • S.M. Milner et al.

    A comparison of two different 2400 mOsm solutions for resuscitation of major burns

    J Burn Care Rehabil

    (1997)
  • Cited by (101)

    • Changes in total body surface area and the distribution of skin surfaces in relation to body mass index

      2020, Burns
      Citation Excerpt :

      These formulas only provide a starting point since the severity of burn, inhalation injury, associated injury, patient age and comorbidities can alter fluid estimates [24]. Despite the miscalculations made using the available formulas, the “Parkland” formula, which is based on the patient’s weight and %TBSA affected by a burn remains the most widely used formula for fluid resuscitation by burn units globally [25,26,33–39]. The proposed BMI adjusted charts complement fluid resuscitation formulas, providing a more accurate assessment and thus a more accurate calculation of fluid estimates.

    • Management of severe thermal burns in the acute phase in adults and children

      2020, Anaesthesia Critical Care and Pain Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      R2.1.2 – The experts suggest that balanced crystalloid solutions should be used. Severe burn injuries induce early hypovolaemic shock due to inflammation, capillary leak syndrome and alterations in the microcirculation [61]. The severity of this shock and the rapidity of its onset were first described in the 1930s and have been observed repeatedly ever since, including after mass casualty accidents, such as the Los Alfaques disaster in 1978 [62,63].

    • Burn Injuries

      2019, A Practice of Anesthesia for Infants and Children
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text