[Hydroxyethyl starch to protect renal function in laparoscopic surgery]

Safety and efficacy of tetrastarches in surgery and trauma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 130 is a frequently used fluid to replace intravascular losses during surgery or trauma. In the past years, several trials performed in critically ill patients have raised questions regarding the safety of this product. Our aim in this meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 6% HES during surgery and in trauma.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42018100379). We included 85 fully published articles from 1980 to June 2018 according to the protocol and three additional recent articles up to June 2020 in English, French, German, and Spanish reporting on prospective, randomised, and controlled clinical trials applying volume therapy with HES 130/0.4 or HES 130/0.42, including combinations with crystalloids, to patients undergoing surgery. Comparators were albumin, gelatin, and crystalloids only. A meta-analysis could not be performed for the two trauma studies as there was only one study that reported data on endpoints of interest.

RESULTS

Surgical patients treated with HES had lower postoperative serum creatinine (P<0.001) and showed no differences in renal dysfunction, renal failure, or renal replacement therapy. Although there was practically no further difference in the colloids albumin or gelatin, the use of HES improved haemodynamic stability, reduced need for vasopressors (P<0.001), and decreased length of hospital stay (P<0.001) compared with the use of crystalloids alone.

CONCLUSIONS

HES was shown to be safe and efficacious in the perioperative setting. Results of the present meta-analysis suggest that when used with adequate indication, a combination of intravenous fluid therapy with crystalloids and volume replacement with HES as colloid has clinically beneficial effects over using crystalloids only.

Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 and Its Impact on Perioperative Outcome: A Propensity Score Matched Controlled Observation Study

BACKGROUND

Adverse effects of hydroxyethyl starches (HESs) have been verified in patients suffering from sepsis or kidney disease, but not in surgical patients at large. The investigation aimed to determine whether the use of HES 130/0.4 was associated with the incidence of acute postinterventional adverse events compared to Ringer's acetate alone in a perioperative setting.

METHODS

This propensity score matched, controlled observational study was performed in a single-centre university hospital. The perioperative data of 9085 patients were analyzed. Group matching was based on 13 categories including demographic data, type of procedure, and 5 preexisting comorbidities. Duration of procedure and intraoperative transfusion requirements were integrated in the matching process to reduce selection and indication bias. The primary outcome was incidence of postoperative kidney failure. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, fluid requirements, blood loss, hemodynamic stability, and the need for postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) treatment.

RESULTS

The administration of HES 130/0.4 was not associated with an increased frequency of postoperative kidney failure. In-hospital mortality (Ringer's acetate: 2.58%; HES 130/0.4: 2.68%) and the need for ICU care (Ringer's acetate: 30.5%; HES 130/0.4: 34.3%) did not differ significantly between groups. Significant intergroup differences were observed for mean blood loss (Ringer's acetate: 406 ± 821 mL; HES 130/0.4: 867 ± 1275 mL; P < .001) and median length of hospital stay (Ringer's acetate: 10.5 (5/17) days; HES 130/0.4: 12.0 (8/19) days; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

An association between intraoperative HES therapy and postoperative kidney failure was not observed in a mixed cohort of elective surgical patients. In addition, HES 130/0.4 was not associated with an increased morbidity or the need for ICU therapy in this propensity score matched study.

The effect of 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 on renal function, arterial blood pressure, and vasoactive hormones during radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although hydroxyethyl starch (HES) is commonly used as an intravascular volume expander in surgical patients, recent studies suggest that it may increase the risk of renal failure in critically ill patients. We hypothesized that patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and receiving HES would be more likely to develop markers of renal failure, such as increasing urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (u-NGAL), creatinine clearance (C(crea)), and decreasing urine output (UO).

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 40 patients referred for radical prostatectomy received either 6% HES 130/0.4 or saline 0.9%; 7.5 mL/kg during the first hour of surgery and 5 mL/kg in the following hours; u-NGAL, urine albumin, C(crea), UO, arterial blood pressure, and plasma concentrations of creatinine, renin, angiotensin II, aldosterone, and vasopressin were measured before, during, and after surgery.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients completed the study. u-NGAL, C(crea), UO, plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, p-creatinine, urine albumin, and arterial blood pressure were the same in both groups. Blood loss was higher in the HES group (HES 1250 vs saline 750 mL), while p-albumin was reduced to a significantly lower level. P-renin and p-angiotensin-II increased in both groups, whereas p-aldosterone and p-vasopressin increased significantly in the saline group.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of nephrotoxicity after infusion of 6% HES 130/0.4 in patients undergoing prostatectomy with normal preoperative renal function. Hemodynamic stability and infused fluid volume were the same in both groups. We observed an increased blood loss in the group given 6% HES 130/0.4.

Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 versus crystalloid or albumin in patients with sepsis: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of fluid therapy with hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 versus crystalloid or albumin on mortality, kidney injury, bleeding, and serious adverse events in patients with sepsis.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomised clinical trials.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, Biosis Previews, Science Citation Index Expanded, CINAHL, Current Controlled Trials, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Centerwatch to September 2012; hand search of reference lists and other systematic reviews; contact with authors and relevant pharmaceutical companies.

STUDY SELECTION

Eligible trials were randomised clinical trials comparing hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 with either crystalloid or human albumin in patients with sepsis. Published and unpublished trials were included irrespective of language and predefined outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data on methods, interventions, outcomes, and risk of bias. Risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were estimated with fixed and random effects models.

RESULTS

Nine trials that randomised 3456 patients with sepsis were included. Overall, hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 versus crystalloid or albumin did not affect the relative risk of death (1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.22, 3414 patients, eight trials), but in the predefined analysis of trials with low risk of bias the relative risk of death was 1.11 (1.00 to 1.23, trial sequential analysis (TSA) adjusted 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.29, 3016 patients, four trials). In the hydroxyethyl starch group, renal replacement therapy was used more (1.36, 1.08 to 1.72, TSA adjusted 1.03 to 1.80, 1311 patients, five trials), and the relative risk of acute kidney injury was 1.18 (0.99 to 1.40, TSA adjusted 0.90 to 1.54, 994 patients, four trials). More patients in the hydroxyethyl starch group were transfused with red blood cells (1.29, 1.13 to 1.48, TSA adjusted 1.10 to 1.51, 973 patients, three trials), and more patients had serious adverse events (1.30, 1.02 to 1.67, TSA adjusted 0.93 to 1.83, 1069 patients, four trials). The transfused volume of red blood cells did not differ between the groups (mean difference 65 mL, 95% confidence interval -20 to 149 mL, three trials).

CONCLUSION

In conventional meta-analyses including recent trial data, hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 versus crystalloid or albumin increased the use of renal replacement therapy and transfusion with red blood cells, and resulted in more serious adverse events in patients with sepsis. It seems unlikely that hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.38-0.45 provides overall clinical benefit for patients with sepsis.

Hydroxyethyl starch or saline for fluid resuscitation in intensive care

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) for fluid resuscitation have not been fully evaluated, and adverse effects of HES on survival and renal function have been reported.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 7000 patients who had been admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 6% HES with a molecular weight of 130 kD and a molar substitution ratio of 0.4 (130/0.4, Voluven) in 0.9% sodium chloride or 0.9% sodium chloride (saline) for all fluid resuscitation until ICU discharge, death, or 90 days after randomization. The primary outcome was death within 90 days. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury and failure and treatment with renal-replacement therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 597 of 3315 patients (18.0%) in the HES group and 566 of 3336 (17.0%) in the saline group died (relative risk in the HES group, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.18; P=0.26). There was no significant difference in mortality in six predefined subgroups. Renal-replacement therapy was used in 235 of 3352 patients (7.0%) in the HES group and 196 of 3375 (5.8%) in the saline group (relative risk, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45; P=0.04). In the HES and saline groups, renal injury occurred in 34.6% and 38.0% of patients, respectively (P=0.005), and renal failure occurred in 10.4% and 9.2% of patients, respectively (P=0.12). HES was associated with significantly more adverse events (5.3% vs. 2.8%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

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. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and others; CHEST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00935168.).

[Risk factors for postoperative acute kidney injury in a cohort of 2378 patients from 59 hospitals]

OBJECTIVES

To assess risk factors for postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in adults with normal renal function hospitalized for major surgery. To analyze mortality and length of hospital stay in patients who develop postoperative AKI.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data for analysis were drawn from the 2006 ARISCAT study. The dependent variable was postoperative AKI defined as a decline in renal function demonstrated by a rise in plasma creatinine level to twice the baseline measurement or a 50% reduction in the glomerular filtration rate. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify preoperative and intraoperative risk factors.

RESULTS

We analyzed 2378 of the ARISCAT cases, which had been enrolled from 59 participating hospitals; 25 patients (1.1%) developed AKI. Analysis identified 5 risk factors: age, peripheral arterial disease, type of surgical incision, blood loss, and infusion of colloids. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88% (95% confidence interval, 0.79%-0.69%). Duration of hospital stay was longer for patients with postoperative AKI (21.8 days, vs 5.5 days for other patients; P=.007). Mortality was higher in patients with AKI at 30 days (36% vs 0.9%) and at 3 months (48% vs 1.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of postoperative AKI was slightly over 1%. Knowledge of postoperative AKI risk factors can facilitate the planning of surgical interventions and anesthesia to reduce subsequent morbidity and mortality and length of hospital stay.