Fluid Resuscitation Dilemma in End-stage Renal Disease Patients Presenting with Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: This study aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of guideline-directed fluid resuscitation (GDFR) compared with conservative fluid management in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with sepsis by evaluating 90-day mortality and intubation rate. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted across multiple databases using specific keywords and controlled vocabulary. The search strategy, implemented until October 1, 2023, aimed to identify studies examining fluid resuscitation in ESRD patients with sepsis. The review process was streamlined using Covidence software. A fourth reviewer resolved discrepancies in study inclusion. A random-effects model with the generic Mantel-Haenszel method was preferred for integrating odds ratios (ORs). Sensitivity analysis and publication bias analysis were performed. Results: Of the 1274 identified studies, 10 were selected for inclusion, examining 1184 patients, 593 of whom received GDFR. Four studies were selected to investigate the intubation rate, including 304 patients. No significant mortality or intubation rate difference was spotted between both groups [OR = 1.23; confidence interval (CI) = 0.92-1.65; I ²  = 0% and OR = 1.91; CI = 0.91-4.04]. In most studies, sensitivity analysis using the leave-one-out approach revealed higher mortality and intubation rates. The Egger test results indicated no statistically significant publication bias across the included studies. Conclusion: Our research contradicts the common assumption about the effectiveness of GDFR for sepsis patients with ESRD. It suggests that this approach, while not superior to the conservative strategy, may potentially be harmful.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.