This review examines evolving resuscitation strategies in trauma ICU, suggesting individualized approaches may optimize patient outcomes.
Management of patients in the trauma intensive care unit (ICU) presents unique challenges, as they are often admitted with physiological instability and incomplete resuscitation. Traditional aggressive resuscitation strategies are increasingly being questioned in favor of targeted, physiology-guided interventions. This review explores evolving strategies and controversies in trauma ICU resuscitation, with a focus on fluid management, vasopressor use, blood product selection, and physiology-driven endpoints. Trauma resuscitation emphasizes early hemorrhage control, hemodynamic stabilization, and maintenance of end-organ perfusion. The role of aggressive versus restrictive crystalloid administration is examined, highlighting the risks of dilutional coagulopathy and organ edema. The transition toward restrictive strategies, such as permissive hypotension and damage control resuscitation, is supported by recent trials, although patient-specific exceptions exist e.g., traumatic brain injury (TBI). Fluid type selection remains contentious, with balanced crystalloids preferred over normal saline because of the lower risk of hyperchloremic acidosis, while colloids and hypertonic solutions offer limited benefits. Whole blood has re-emerged as a promising alternative to component therapy, particularly in massive transfusion protocols. The use of vasopressors remains controversial but may be warranted in cases of TBI, spinal trauma, or post-resuscitation vasoplegia. A shift toward physiology-guided resuscitation using lactate clearance, base deficit, point-of-care ultrasound, and advanced hemodynamic indices has improved the precision and efficacy of trauma care. Trauma ICU resuscitation is moving toward individualized, endpoint-driven management. While evidence continues to evolve, integrating modern monitoring with tailored interventions holds the potential to optimize outcomes and reduce complications in critically injured patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andleeb et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: