The Boldt affair: correcting a collective failure

Colloids Yes or No? - a "Gretchen Question" Answered

Colloid solutions, both natural and synthetic, had been widely accepted as having superior volume expanding effects than crystalloids. Synthetic colloid solutions were previously considered at least as effective as natural colloids, as well as being cheaper and easily available. As a result, synthetic colloids (and HES in particular) were the preferred resuscitation fluid in many countries. In the past decade, several cascading events have called into question their efficacy and revealed their harmful effects. In 2013, the medicines authorities placed substantial restrictions on HES administration in people which has resulted in an overall decrease in their use. Whether natural colloids (such as albumin-containing solutions) should replace synthetic colloids remains inconclusive based on the current evidence. Albumin seems to be safer than synthetic colloids in people, but clear evidence of a positive effect on survival is still lacking. Furthermore, species-specific albumin is not widely available, while xenotransfusions with human serum albumin have known side effects. Veterinary data on the safety and efficacy of synthetic and natural colloids is limited to mostly retrospective evaluations or experimental studies with small numbers of patients (mainly dogs). Large, prospective, randomized, long-term outcome-oriented studies are lacking. This review focuses on advantages and disadvantages of synthetic and natural colloids in veterinary medicine. Adopting human guidelines is weighed against the particularities of our specific patient populations, including the risk-benefit ratio and lack of alternatives available in human medicine.

A scoping review of retracted publications in anesthesiology

Context:

Fraudulent publication is a scourge of scientific research.

Objectives:

This scoping review was aimed at characterizing retracted publications for fraud or plagiarism in the field of anesthesia. Does the reputation of the journal (Quartile and Impact Factor, IF) protect the reader from the risk of having the manuscript he read withdrawn for fraud/plagiarism?

Methods/Design:

This scoping review was planned following the Joanna Briggs Institute recommendations. Data sources: PubMed and the Retraction Watch Database (http://retractiondatabase.org/RetractionSearch.aspx?). Study selection: All types of publications retracted. Data extraction: Year, first author nationality, journal name, journal category, IF, Quartile, H index. Data analysis: The association with Quartile and IF was investigated.

Results:

No significant association between retraction of papers published in no-Quartile journals and retractions published in journals placed in the highest quartile.

Conclusions:

The quality of the surveillance in paper submission is not higher in journals of the first Quartile than in journals not placed in other Quartiles. (The protocol was prospectively registered in the Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TGKNE)

Starch Wars-New Episodes of the Saga. Changes in Regulations on Hydroxyethyl Starch in the European Union

After a safety review of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) solutions in 2013, restrictions on the use of HES were introduced in the European Union (EU) to reduce the risk of kidney injury and death in certain patient populations. Similar restrictions were introduced by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States and other countries. In October 2017, a second safety review of HES solutions was triggered by the European pharmacovigilance authorities based on a request by the Swedish Medical Products Agency to completely suspend HES. After several meetings and repeated evaluations, the recommendation to ban HES was ultimately not endorsed by the responsible committee; however, there was a vote for more restricted access to the drug and rigorous monitoring of policy adherence. This review delineates developments in the European pharmacovigilance risk assessment of HES solutions between 2013 and 2018. In addition, the divergent experts' opinions and the controversy surrounding this official assessment are described. As the new decisions might influence the availability of HES products for veterinary patients, potential alternatives to HES solutions, such as albumin solutions and gelatin, are briefly discussed.

Controversies in the use of hydroxyethyl starch solutions in small animal emergency and critical care

OBJECTIVES

To (1) review the development and medical applications of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) solutions with particular emphasis on its physiochemical properties; (2) critically appraise the available evidence in human and veterinary medicine, and (3) evaluate the potential risks and benefits associated with their use in critically ill small animals.

DATA SOURCES

Human and veterinary original research articles, scientific reviews, and textbook sources from 1950 to the present.

HUMAN DATA SYNTHESIS

HES solutions have been used extensively in people for over 30 years and ever since its introduction there has been a great deal of debate over its safety and efficacy. Recently, results of seminal trials and meta-analyses showing increased risks related to kidney dysfunction and mortality in septic and critically ill patients, have led to the restriction of HES use in these patient populations by European regulatory authorities. Although the initial ban on the use of HES in Europe has been eased, proof regarding the benefits and safety profile of HES in trauma and surgical patient populations has been requested by these same European regulatory authorities.

VETERINARY DATA SYNTHESIS

The veterinary literature is limited mostly to experimental studies and clinical investigations with small populations of patients with short-term end points and there is insufficient evidence to generate recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there are no consensus recommendations regarding the use of HES in veterinary medicine. Veterinarians and institutions affected by the HES restrictions have had to critically reassess the risks and benefits related to HES usage based on the available information and sometimes adapt their procedures and policies based on their reassessment. Meanwhile, large, prospective, randomized veterinary studies evaluating HES use are needed to achieve relevant levels of evidence to enable formulation of specific veterinary guidelines.

Delayed volume resuscitation during initial management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

In acute traumatic bleeding, permissive arterial hypotension with delayed volume resuscitation is an established lifesaving concept as abridge to surgical control. This study investigated whether preoperatively administered volume also correlated inversely with survival after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA).

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed prospectively collected and validated data of a consecutive cohort of patients with rAAAs (January 2001 to December 2010). Generally, fluid resuscitation was guided clinically by the patient's blood pressure and consciousness. All intravenous fluids (crystalloids, colloids, and blood products) administered before aortic clamping or endovascular sealing were abstracted from paramedic and anesthesia documentation and normalized to speed of administration (liters per hour). Logistic regression modeling, adjusted for suspected confounding covariates, was used to investigate whether total volume was independently associated with risk of death within 30 days of rAAA repair.

RESULTS

A total of 248 patients with rAAAs were analyzed, of whom 237 (96%) underwent open repair. A median of 0.91 L of total volume per hour (interquartile range, 0.54-1.50 L/h) had been administered preoperatively to these patients. The postoperative 30-day mortality rate was 15.3% (38 deaths). The preoperative rate of fluid infusion correlated with 30-day mortality after adjustment for confounding factors, and the association persisted robustly through sensitivity analyses: each additional liter per hour increased the odds of perioperative death by 1.57-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.33; P = .026).

CONCLUSIONS

Aggressive volume resuscitation of patients with rAAAs before proximal aortic control predicted an increased perioperative risk of death, which was independent of systolic blood pressure. Therefore, volume resuscitation should be delayed until surgical control of bleeding is achieved.