Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Meta-analysis shows lactated ringer's may shorten hospital stay but offers no mortality benefit in acute pancreatitisNew review shows lactated ringer fluid may shorten hospital stays for some pancreatitis patients without saving lives

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider that lactated ringer's shortens hospital stay but offers no mortality benefit in acute pancreatitis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined fluid resuscitation strategies for patients with acute pancreatitis. The study compared lactated ringer's (LR) against normal saline (NS) as the primary intervention. The primary outcomes included mortality, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, ICU transfer, pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and hospital length of stay. The sample size was not reported, and the setting was not reported.

Regarding overall mortality, the analysis found no difference between LR and NS. The odds ratio was 1.020 with a 95% CI of 0.865–1.359 and a p value of 0.895. For mortality in severe acute pancreatitis, no mortality benefit for LR was observed. The odds ratio was 0.931 with a 95% CI of 0.157–5.505 and a p value of 0.937.

In randomized controlled trials, LR significantly shortened hospital length of stay. The standardized mean difference was -0.307 with a 95% CI of -0.511 to -0.102 and a p value of 0.003. In small-sample studies involving 100 cases, LR also significantly shortened length of stay. Safety profiles were comparable between the two fluids. However, the study had insufficient power for pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and length of stay. Trial sequential analysis confirmed true negative findings for mortality, ICU transfer, and SIRS but indicated insufficient power for other outcomes. The association with prolonged LOS in patients with SAP requires further validation.

Doctors often choose between two common fluids to treat patients with acute pancreatitis. One is normal saline, and the other is lactated ringer. A new review looked at many studies to see if one fluid works better than the other for saving lives or reducing inflammation.

The results showed no difference in death rates between the two fluids. This held true for all patients, including those with very severe cases. The chance of needing intensive care or developing organ failure was also the same regardless of which fluid was used.

Some studies found that lactated ringer fluid helped patients leave the hospital faster. This effect was seen in trials and in smaller groups of patients. However, the review could not fully prove benefits for preventing tissue death or organ failure because the studies were not large enough.

Both fluids are safe to use. Experts say doctors should not prefer one over the other right now. More large studies are needed to understand which fluid is best for different types of patients.

What this means for you:
Lactated ringer fluid does not save lives but may shorten hospital stays for some patients with acute pancreatitis.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedMay 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
Intravenous fluid resuscitation is fundamental in acute pancreatitis (AP), but optimal crystalloid selection remains debated. This meta-analysis compares lactated ringer’s (LR) and normal saline (NS) for outcomes in AP. We conducted the systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, and WanFang (Until July 2025) for studies comparing LR and NS in AP. Primary outcomes included mortality, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), ICU transfer, pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Random- or fixed-effects models were used based on heterogeneity (I2). Overall mortality did not differ between LR and NS (OR = 1.020, 95% CI: 0.865–1.359, p = 0.895). No mortality benefit was observed for LR in any severity subgroup, including severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) (OR = 0.931, 95% CI: 0.157–5.505, p = 0.937). LR significantly shortened LOS in RCTs (SMD = −0.307, 95% CI: −0.511 to −0.102, p = 0.003) and small-sample studies (100 cases) subgroups. Trial sequential analysis confirmed true negative findings for mortality, ICU transfer and SIRS, but indicated insufficient power for pancreatic necrosis, organ failure and LOS. LR and NS demonstrate comparable mortality and safety profiles, with no significant difference in overall LOS. Although LR may shorten LOS in certain subgroups, its association with prolonged LOS in patients with SAP requires further validation. Therefore, based on current evidence, no preference can be recommended for either fluid, and larger standardized trials are warranted.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.