Optimizing Fluid Resuscitation in Adults With Major Burns: A Randomized Trial of Burn Navigator™ Versus Parkland Formula

Burn injuries vary widely in cause and severity but share the fundamental pathologic feature of liquefactive necrosis of the skin, the body's largest organ and a key component of the immune defense system. When burns involve 20% or more of the total body surface area (TBSA), a profound systemic inflammatory response develops. This response causes extensive fluid shifts and third spacing, leading to loss of intravascular volume, reduced organ perfusion, and a high risk of burn shock. To counter these physiological changes, intravenous fluid resuscitation during the first 24-48 hours post-burn is an essential component of management.

Traditional burn resuscitation guidelines-most notably the Parkland formula (4 mL/kg/TBSA) and the Modified Brooke formula (2 mL/kg/TBSA)-provide initial estimates for required fluid volumes. However, these formulas are static and may not reflect rapid, patient-specific changes. Excessive fluid administration can result in life-threatening complications such as abdominal, extremity, or ocular compartment syndrome, while inadequate resuscitation can precipitate acute kidney injury, burn shock, or multi-organ failure.

Modern approaches emphasize dynamic hourly titration of fluids based on physiologic response, particularly urinary output (UO), to avoid under- and over-resuscitation. To support clinicians in making real-time adjustments, the Burn Resuscitation Decision Support System (BRDSS) was developed by the United States Army Institute of Surgical Research and UTMB. Now commercialized as the Burn Navigator™, this system uses a mathematical model incorporating UO trends, fluid infusion rates, burn size, body weight, and time post-injury to generate hourly fluid recommendations. Studies have shown it can reduce overall fluid exposure compared to manual adjustments.

Despite widespread adoption in military and civilian burn centers, there has been no comprehensive evaluation of its performance across varied clinical environments.