Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer's acetate in severe sepsis.

@article{Perner2012HydroxyethylS1,
  title={Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer's acetate in severe sepsis.},
  author={Anders Perner and Nicolai Haase and Anne Berit Guttormsen and Jyrki J. Tenhunen and Gudmundur K. Klemenzson and Anders Aneman and Kristian R{\o}rb{\ae}k Madsen and Morten Hylander M{\o}ller and Jeanie M Elkj{\ae}r and Lone M. Poulsen and Asger Bendtsen and Robert Winding and Morten Steensen and Pawel Berezowicz and Peter S{\o}e-Jensen and Morten H. Bestle and Kristian Strand and J{\o}rgen Wiis and Jonathan O White and Klaus J Thornberg and Lars Quist and Jonas Nielsen and Lasse H{\o}gh Andersen and Lars Broks{\o} Holst and Katrin Maria Thormar and Anne-Lene Kj{\ae}ldgaard and Maria Louise Fabritius and Frederik Mondrup and Frank Christian Pott and Thea Palsgaard M{\o}ller and Per Winkel and J{\o}rn Wetterslev},
  journal={The New England journal of medicine},
  year={2012},
  volume={367 2},
  pages={
          124-34
        }
}
BACKGROUND Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) [corrected] is widely used for fluid resuscitation in intensive care units (ICUs), but its safety and efficacy have not been established in patients with severe sepsis. METHODS In this multicenter, parallel-group, blinded trial, we randomly assigned patients with severe sepsis to fluid resuscitation in the ICU with either 6% HES 130/0.42 (Tetraspan) or Ringer's acetate at a dose of up to 33 ml per kilogram of ideal body weight per day. The primary outcome… 

Figures and Tables from this paper

Hydroxyethyl starch or saline for fluid resuscitation in intensive care.
TLDR
In patients in the ICU, there was no significant difference in 90-day mortality between patients resuscitated with 6% HES (130/0.4) or saline, however, more patients who received resuscitation with HES were treated with renal-replacement therapy.
Bleeding and risk of death with hydroxyethyl starch in severe sepsis: post hoc analyses of a randomized clinical trial
TLDR
Treatment with HES increased the risk of bleeding which was associated with increased risk of death, and HES-induced bleeding complications may negatively affect outcome in patients with severe sepsis.
Hydroxyethyl starch in sepsis.
  • N. Haase
  • Medicine
    Danish medical journal
  • 2014
TLDR
A randomised clinical trial is one of several high-quality trials in critically ill patients with and without sepsis that now provide evidence that the use of tetrastarch impairs kidney function and haemostasis and may even increase mortality.
Early fluid resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (6%) in severe burn injury: a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical trial
TLDR
There was no evidence that early fluid resuscitation with balanced HES 130/0.4 (6%) in addition to lactated Ringer’s solution would lead to a volume-sparing effect in severe burn injury and the findings that early renal function, incidence of ARDS, length of stay, and mortality were not negatively influenced by HES.
Risks of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 in Cardiac Surgery
  • G. Haynes
  • Medicine
    Journal of pharmacy practice
  • 2014
TLDR
Meta-analyses of randomized trials have demonstrated that excess mortality, renal failure, and bleeding are class effects of HES solutions, and HES was also an independent risk factor for mortality in a retrospective hospital discharge database study of 19 578 cardiac surgery patients.
Albumin replacement in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.
TLDR
In patients with severe sepsis, albumin replacement in addition to crystalloids, as compared with crystalloids alone, did not improve the rate of survival at 28 and 90 days.
Hydroxyethyl starch - friend or foe?
TLDR
A narrative review of recent literature was undertaken to establish the current utility and efficacy of HES in clinical practice and aims at increasing awareness amongst anesthetists and critical care specialist about correct and careful fluid administration.
Impact of 6% balanced hydroxyethyl starch following cardiopulmonary bypass on renal function: a retrospective study
TLDR
The moderate dose administration of HES in the postoperative period following cardiac surgery might be associated with the risk of acute kidney injury, however, it was not associated with serious adverse outcomes such as new RRT or mortality.
Hydroxyethyl starches in the intensive care unit
TLDR
The recently published evidences on the benefit-risk ratio of HES are discussed and the reasons that led to such a delay before health alert was triggered are discussed.
The Dilemma for Using Hydroxyethyl Starch Solutions for Perioperative Fluid Management
TLDR
There are sufficient data to suggest that HES has similar risks also in these patients and should therefore be avoided, and no definitive, large-scale randomized controlled trials with patient-relevant outcomes and long-term follow-up exist in this population.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 37 REFERENCES
A Systematic Review of Third-Generation Hydroxyethyl Starch (HES 130/0.4) in Resuscitation: Safety Not Adequately Addressed
TLDR
Clinicians should be aware that there is no convincing evidence that third-generation HES 130/0.4 is safe in surgical, emergency, or intensive care patients despite publication of numerous clinical studies, and use of older HES solutions may be associated with serious side effects.
Effects of hydroxyethyl starch administration on renal function in critically ill patients.
TLDR
Hematological cancer, the presence of sepsis, cardiovascular failure, and baseline renal function as assessed by the SOFA score were independent risk factors for the subsequent need for RRT in the ICU.
Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis.
TLDR
The use of intensive insulin therapy placed critically ill patients with sepsis at increased risk for serious adverse events related to hypoglycemia and HES was harmful, and its toxicity increased with accumulating doses.
Assessment of hemodynamic efficacy and safety of 6% hydroxyethylstarch 130/0.4 vs. 0.9% NaCl fluid replacement in patients with severe sepsis: The CRYSTMAS study
TLDR
Significantly less volume was required to achieve HDS for HES vs. NaCl in the initial phase of fluid resuscitation in severe sepsis patients without any difference for adverse events in both groups.
Impact of albumin compared to saline on organ function and mortality of patients with severe sepsis
TLDR
Assessment of the effect of random assignment to fluid resuscitation with albumin or saline on organ function and mortality in patients with severe sepsis and pre-defined subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial conducted in the intensive care units of 16 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand found that administration of albumin compared to saline did not impair renal or other organ function or decrease the risk of death.
A comparison of albumin and saline for fluid resuscitation in the intensive care unit.
TLDR
In patients in the ICU, use of either 4 percent albumin or normal saline for fluid resuscitation results in similar outcomes at 28 days, with no significant differences between the groups.
Consensus statement of the ESICM task force on colloid volume therapy in critically ill patients
TLDR
It is recommended that any new colloid should be introduced into clinical practice only after its patient-important safety parameters are established and not to use hyperoncotic solutions for fluid resuscitation.
Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock.
TLDR
Low-dose vasopressin did not reduce mortality rates as compared with norepinephrine among patients with septic shock who were being treated with conventional (catecholamine) vasopressesors, and a test for heterogeneity between these two study strata was not significant.
...
1
2
3
4
...