Understanding the Harms of HES: A Review of the Evidence to Date

Perioperative Fluid Management in Surgical Patients: A Review

Intravenous (IV) fluids are one of the most widely prescribed medications. Despite their frequent usage, IV fluids are often not used appropriately. High-quality evidence to guide the surgeon in the perioperative period is sparse. A plethora of choices for IV fluids exists with limited evidence to help guide the surgeon in specific patient populations and situations. To address this, the authors have set out to provide a critical review of commonly used IV fluids to treat surgical patients. Gaps in the existing literature for the surgical population will also be discussed as potential target areas for future research.

Resuscitation fluids as drugs: targeting the endothelial glycocalyx

ABSTRACT

Fluid resuscitation is an essential intervention in critically ill patients, and its ultimate goal is to restore tissue perfusion. Critical illnesses are often accompanied by glycocalyx degradation caused by inflammatory reactions, hypoperfusion, shock, and so forth, leading to disturbed microcirculatory perfusion and organ dysfunction. Therefore, maintaining or even restoring the glycocalyx integrity may be of high priority in the therapeutic strategy. Like drugs, however, different resuscitation fluids may have beneficial or harmful effects on the integrity of the glycocalyx. The purpose of this article is to review the effects of different resuscitation fluids on the glycocalyx. Many animal studies have shown that normal saline might be associated with glycocalyx degradation, but clinical studies have not confirmed this finding. Hydroxyethyl starch (HES), rather than other synthetic colloids, may restore the glycocalyx. However, the use of HES also leads to serious adverse events such as acute kidney injury and bleeding tendencies. Some studies have suggested that albumin may restore the glycocalyx, whereas others have suggested that balanced crystalloids might aggravate glycocalyx degradation. Notably, most studies did not correct the effects of the infusion rate or fluid volume; therefore, the results of using balanced crystalloids remain unclear. Moreover, mainly animal studies have suggested that plasma may protect and restore glycocalyx integrity, and this still requires confirmation by high-quality clinical studies.

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.

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.