Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25099709›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2014

Randomised trials of human albumin for adults with sepsis: systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of all-cause mortality.

Amit Patel, Michael A Laffan, Umeer Waheed, Stephen J Brett

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03654001 (Efficacy of Albumin Replacement and Balanced Solution in Patients With Septic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 72 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
29.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03654001 phase3completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of Albumin Replacement and Balanced Solution in Patients With Septic Shock (the ALBIOSS-BALANCED Trial): a 2-by-2 Factorial, Investigator-initiated, Open- Label, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore PoliclinicoRan2019 to 2025Enrolled1,319ConditionsSeptic ShockArmsAlbumin, Balanced
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 280 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Blood Product Use for Hemorrhage during Cesarean Delivery.American journal of perinatology · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Review

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amit PatelCentre for Perioperative Medicine and Critical Care Research, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London W12 0HS, UK MRC Clinical Sciences Centre, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College London, London, UK Centre for Haematology, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College London, London, UK amit.patel@imperial.ac.uk.
Michael A LaffanCentre for Haematology, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Umeer WaheedCentre for Perioperative Medicine and Critical Care Research, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London W12 0HS, UK.
Stephen J BrettCentre for Perioperative Medicine and Critical Care Research, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London W12 0HS, UK.
Hammersmith Hospital · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of pooled human albumin solutions as part of fluid volume expansion and resuscitation (with or without improvement of baseline hypoalbuminaemia) in critically unwell adults with sepsis of any severity.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials, with trial sequential analysis, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, PubMed Central, Web of Science (includes Medline, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, Data Citation Index, Chinese Science Citation Database, CAB abstracts, Derwent Innovations Index), OvidSP (includes Embase, Ovid Medline, HMIC, PsycINFO, Maternity and Infant Care, Transport Database), Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, controlled-trials.com, online material, relevant conference proceedings, hand searching of reference lists, and contact with authors as necessary. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Prospective randomised clinical trials of adults with sepsis of any severity (with or without baseline hypoalbuminaemia) in critical or intensive care who received pooled human albumin solutions as part of fluid volume expansion and resuscitation (with or without improvement of hypoalbuminaemia) compared with those who received control fluids (crystalloid or colloid), were included if all-cause mortality outcome data were available. No restriction of language, date, publication status, or primary study endpoint was applied. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion, extracted data to assess risk of bias, trial methods, patients, interventions, comparisons, and outcome. The relative risk of all-cause mortality was calculated using a random effects model accounting for clinical heterogeneity. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: All-cause mortality at final follow-up.

resultsEighteen articles reporting on 16 primary clinical trials that included 4190 adults in critical or intensive care with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock. A median of 70.0 g daily of pooled human albumin was received over a median of 3 days by adults with a median age of 60.8 years as part of fluid volume expansion and resuscitation, with or without correction of hypoalbuminaemia. The relative risk of death was similar between albumin groups (that received a median of 175 g in total) and control fluid groups (relative risk 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.01; P=0.11; I(2)=0%). Trial sequential analysis corrected the 95% confidence interval for random error (0.85 to 1.02; D(2)=0%). Eighty eight per cent of the required information size (meta-analysis sample size) of 4894 patients was achieved, and the cumulative effect size measure (z score) entered the futility area, supporting the notion of no relative benefit of albumin (GRADE quality of evidence was moderate). Evidence of no difference was also found when albumin was compared with crystalloid fluid (relative risk 0.93; 0.86 to 1.01; P=0.07; I(2)=0%) in 3878 patents (GRADE quality of evidence was high; 79.9% of required information size) or colloid fluids in 299 patients (relative risk 1.04; 0.79 to 1.38; P=0.76; I(2)=0%) (GRADE quality of evidence was very low; 5.8% of required information size). When studies at high risk of bias were excluded in a predefined subgroup analysis, the finding of no mortality benefit remained, and the cumulative z score was just outside the boundary of futility. Overall, the meta-analysis was robust to sensitivity, subgroup, meta-regression, and trial sequential analyses.

conclusionsIn this analysis, human albumin solutions as part of fluid volume expansion and resuscitation for critically unwell adults with sepsis of any severity (with or without baseline hypoalbuminaemia) were not robustly effective at reducing all-cause mortality. Albumin seems to be safe in this setting, as a signal towards harm was not detected, but this analysis does not support a recommendation for use.

Indexed as

Crystalloid SolutionsFluid TherapyHumansHypoalbuminemiaIntensive Care UnitsIsotonic SolutionsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResuscitationSepsisSerum AlbuminCrystalloid SolutionsIsotonic SolutionsSerum Albumin

Identifiers

PMID25099709
PMCPMC4106199
OpenAlexW2027555966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.