Peri-operative tolerance to large-dose 6% HES 200/0.5 in major urological procedures compared with 5% human albumin

Intravenous Fluid of Choice in Major Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review

Background

Intravenous fluid therapy plays a role in maintaining the hemodynamic status for tissue perfusion and electrolyte hemostasis during surgery. Recent trials in critically ill patients reported serious side effects of some types of fluids. Since the most suitable type of fluid is debatable, a consensus in perioperative patients has not been reached.

Method

We performed a systematic review of randomized control trials (RCTs) that compared two or more types of fluids in major abdominal surgery. The outcomes were related to bleeding, hemodynamic status, length of hospital stay, and complications, such as kidney injury, electrolyte abnormality, major cardiac adverse event, nausea, vomiting, and mortality. A literature search was performed using Medline and EMBASE up to December 2019. The data were pooled to investigate the effect of fluid on macrocirculation and intravascular volume effect.

Results

Forty-three RCTs were included. Eighteen fluids were compared: nine were crystalloids and nine were colloids. The results were categorized into macrocirculation and intravascular volume effect, microcirculation, anti-inflammatory parameters, vascular permeability, renal function (colloids), renal function and electrolytes (crystalloids), coagulation and bleeding, return of bowel function, and postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV). We found that no specific type of fluid led to mortality and every type of colloid was equivalent in volume expansion and did not cause kidney injury. However, hydroxyethyl starch and dextran may lead to increased bleeding. Normal saline can cause kidney injury which can lead to renal replacement therapy, and dextrose fluid can decrease PONV.

Conclusion

In our opinion, it is safe to give a balanced crystalloid as the maintenance fluid and give a colloid, such as HES130/0.4, 4% gelatin, or human albumin, as a volume expander.

Albumin: friend or foe?

In the absence of red blood cells or any other colloid, human albumin has saved thousands of lives since its first use in 1941. However, for general volume expansion purposes including trauma resuscitation, published evidence suggests that albumin has now been superseded by synthetic colloids, which are more effective volume expanders, have vascular protective effects and are cheaper.

Adverse effects of hydroxyethyl starch (HES 130/0.4) on intestinal barrier integrity and metabolic function are abrogated by supplementation with Albumin

Background

Volume resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starch (HES) is controversially discussed and we recently showed that HES perfusion impairs endothelial and epithelial intestinal barrier integrity. Here we investigated whether Albumin containing HES solutions are superior to HES alone in maintaining intestinal barrier function.

Methods

An isolated perfused model of the mouse small intestine was used to investigate the effects of: (i) 3 % Albumin (Alb), (ii) 3 % HES or (iii) 1.5 % HES/1.5 % Albumin (HES/Alb). Intestinal morphology, cell damage, metabolic functions, fluid shifts and endothelial/epithelial barrier permeability were evaluated. Potentially involved signaling mechanisms (Erk1/2, Akt and Stat5 phosphorylation) were screened.

Results

HES induced histomorphological damage (p < 0.01 vs. Alb), by trend elevated the amount of luminal intestinal fatty acid binding protein and reduced galactose uptake (p < 0.001 vs. Alb). Luminal and lymphatic flow rates were increased (p < 0.001 vs. Alb), while vascular flow was decreased (p < 0.001 vs. Alb) during HES perfusion. HES also increased the vascular to luminal FITC-dextran transfer (p < 0.001 vs. Alb), pointing towards a fluid shift from the vascular to the luminal and lymphatic compartments during HES perfusion. Addition of Alb (HES/Alb) reversed all adverse effects of HES (p < 0.05 vs. HES), restored barrier integrity (p < 0.05 vs. HES) and improved metabolic function of the intestine (p < 0.001 vs. HES; p < 0.05 vs. Alb). Mechanistically, HES/Alb perfusion resulted in an increased phosphorylation of Erk1/2 and Akt kinases (p < 0.001 vs. HES), while Stat5 remained unchanged.

Conclusions

Albumin supplementation abrogates the adverse effects of HES in the intestine and underlying mechanism may function via phosphorylation of Erk1/2 and Akt. Albumin containing HES solutions are superior to HES alone and may improve the suitability of HES in the clinic.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12967-016-0810-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Hydroxyeyhyl starch: Controversies revisited

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) family has been one of the cornerstones in fluid management for over four decades. Recent evidence from clinical studies and meta-analyses has raised few concerns about the safety of these fluids, especially in certain subpopulations of patients. High-quality clinical trials and meta-analyses have emphasized nephrotoxic effects, increased risk of bleeding, and a trend toward higher mortality in these patients after the use of HES solutions. Scientific evidence was derived from international guidelines, aggregated research literature, and opinion-based evidence was obtained from surveys and other activities (e.g., internet postings). On critical analysis of the current data available, it can be summarized that further large scale trials are still indicated before HES can be discarded.

Interventions for protecting renal function in the perioperative period

BACKGROUND

Various methods have been used to try to protect kidney function in patients undergoing surgery. These most often include pharmacological interventions such as dopamine and its analogues, diuretics, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), sodium bicarbonate, antioxidants and erythropoietin (EPO).

OBJECTIVES

This review is aimed at determining the effectiveness of various measures advocated to protect patients' kidneys during the perioperative period.We considered the following questions: (1) Are any specific measures known to protect kidney function during the perioperative period? (2) Of measures used to protect the kidneys during the perioperative period, does any one method appear to be more effective than the others? (3) Of measures used to protect the kidneys during the perioperative period,does any one method appear to be safer than the others?

SEARCH METHODS

In this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2012), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) (1966 to August 2012) and EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1988 to August 2012). We originally handsearched six journals (Anesthesia and Analgesia, Anesthesiology, Annals of Surgery, British Journal of Anaesthesia, Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, and Journal of Vascular Surgery) (1985 to 2004). However, because these journals are properly indexed in MEDLINE, we decided to rely on electronic searches only without handsearching the journals from 2004 onwards.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomized controlled trials in adults undergoing surgery for which a treatment measure was used for the purpose of providing renal protection during the perioperative period.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We selected 72 studies for inclusion in this review. Two review authors extracted data from all selected studies and entered them into RevMan 5.1; then the data were appropriately analysed. We performed subgroup analyses for type of intervention, type of surgical procedure and pre-existing renal dysfunction. We undertook sensitivity analyses for studies with high and moderately good methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

The updated review included data from 72 studies, comprising a total of 4378 participants. Of these, 2291 received some form of treatment and 2087 acted as controls. The interventions consisted most often of different pharmaceutical agents, such as dopamine and its analogues, diuretics, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, NAC, ANP, sodium bicarbonate, antioxidants and EPO or selected hydration fluids. Some clinical heterogeneity and varying risk of bias were noted amongst the studies, although we were able to meaningfully interpret the data. Results showed significant heterogeneity and indicated that most interventions provided no benefit.Data on perioperative mortality were reported in 41 studies and data on acute renal injury in 44 studies (all interventions combined). Because of considerable clinical heterogeneity (different clinical scenarios, as well as considerable methodological variability amongst the studies), we did not perform a meta-analysis on the combined data.Subgroup analysis of major interventions and surgical procedures showed no significant influence of interventions on reported mortality and acute renal injury. For the subgroup of participants who had pre-existing renal damage, the risk of mortality from 10 trials (959 participants) was estimated as odds ratio (OR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.52; the risk of acute renal injury (as reported in the trials) was estimated from 11 trials (979 participants) as OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80. Subgroup analysis of studies that were rated as having low risk of bias revealed that 19 studies reported mortality numbers (1604 participants); OR was 1.01, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.90. Fifteen studies reported data on acute renal injury (criteria chosen by the individual studies; 1600 participants); OR was 1.03, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.97.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No reliable evidence from the available literature suggests that interventions during surgery can protect the kidneys from damage. However, the criteria used to diagnose acute renal damage varied in many of the older studies selected for inclusion in this review, many of which suffered from poor methodological quality such as insufficient participant numbers and poor definitions of end points such as acute renal failure and acute renal injury. Recent methods of detecting renal damage such as the use of specific biomarkers and better defined criteria for identifying renal damage (RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function and end-stage renal failure) or AKI (acute kidney injury)) may have to be explored further to determine any possible benefit derived from interventions used to protect the kidneys during the perioperative period.

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) versus other fluid therapies: effects on kidney function

BACKGROUND

Hydroxyethyl starches (HES) are synthetic colloids commonly used for fluid resuscitation to replace intravascular volume, yet they have been increasingly associated with adverse effects on kidney function. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of HES on kidney function compared to other fluid resuscitation therapies in different patient populations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, MetaRegister and reference lists of articles. The most recent search was completed on November 19, 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which HES was compared to an alternate fluid therapy for the prevention or treatment of effective intravascular volume depletion. Primary outcomes were renal replacement therapy (RRT), author-defined kidney failure and acute kidney injury (AKI) as defined by the RIFLE criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Screening, selection, data extraction and quality assessments for each retrieved article were carried out by two authors using standardised forms. All outcomes were analysed using relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Authors were contacted when published data were incomplete. Preplanned sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed after data were analysed with a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 42 studies (11,399 patients) including 19 studies from the original review (2010), as well as 23 new studies. Fifteen studies were excluded from the original review (nine retracted from publication due to concerns about integrity of data and six lacking individual patient creatinine data for the calculation of RIFLE criteria). Overall, there was a significant increase in the need for RRT in the HES treated individuals compared to individuals treated with other fluid therapies (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.49; 19 studies, 9857 patients) and the number with author-defined kidney failure (RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.00; 15 studies, 1361 patients). The RR of AKI based on RIFLE-F (failure) criteria also showed an increased risk of AKI in individuals treated with HES products (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.30; 15 studies, 8402 participants). The risk of meeting urine output and creatinine based RIFLE-R (risk) criteria for AKI was in contrast in favour of HES therapies (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.99; 20 studies, 8769 patients). However, when RIFLE-R urine output based outcomes were excluded as per study protocol, the direction of AKI risk again favoured the other fluid type, with a non-significant RR of AKI in HES treated patients (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.14; 8445 patients). A more robust effect was seen for the RIFLE-I (injury) outcome, with a RR of AKI of 1.22 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.37; 8338 patients). No differences between subgroups for the RRT and RIFLE-F based outcomes were seen between sepsis versus non-sepsis patients, high molecular weight (MW) and degree of substitution (DS) versus low MW and DS (≥ 200 kDa and > 0.4 DS versus 130 kDa and 0.4 DS) HES solutions, or high versus low dose treatments (i.e. ≥ 2 L versus < 2 L). There were differences identified between sepsis versus non-sepsis subgroups for the RIFLE-R and RIFLE-I based outcomes only, which may reflect the differing renal response to fluid resuscitation in pre-renal versus sepsis-associated AKI. Overall, methodological quality of the studies was good.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence suggests that all HES products increase the risk in AKI and RRT in all patient populations and a safe volume of any HES solution has yet to be determined. In most clinical situations it is likely that these risks outweigh any benefits, and alternate volume replacement therapies should be used in place of HES products.

Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume. However, doubts remain as to which colloid is best. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this, and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Specialised Register (searched 1 December 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2011, issue 4 (The Cochrane Library); MEDLINE (Ovid) (1948 to November Week 3 2011); EMBASE (Ovid) (1974 to 2011 Week 47); ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (1970 to 1 December 2011); ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (1990 to 1 December 2011); CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to 1 December 2011); National Research Register (2007, Issue 1) and PubMed (searched 1 December 2011). Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched, and for the initial version of the review drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information (1999).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. The outcomes sought were death, amount of whole blood transfused, and incidence of adverse reactions.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-six trials, with a total of 5,484 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Quality of allocation concealment was judged to be adequate in 33 trials and poor or uncertain in the rest.Deaths were reported in 57 trials. For albumin or plasma protein fraction (PPF) versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 31 trials (n = 1719) reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.31). When the trials by Boldt were removed from the analysis the pooled RR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.20). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin, nine trials (n = 824) reported mortality. The RR was 0.89 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.21). Removing the study by Boldt from the analysis did not change the RR or CIs. For albumin or PPF versus dextran four trials (n = 360) reported mortality. The RR was 3.75 (95% CI 0.42 to 33.09). For gelatin versus HES 22 trials (n = 1612) reported mortality and the RR was 1.02 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.26). When the trials by Boldt were removed from the analysis the pooled RR was 1.03 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.27). RR was not estimable in the gelatin versus dextran and HES versus dextran groups.Forty-one trials recorded the amount of blood transfused; however, quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Twenty-four trials recorded adverse reactions, with two studies reporting possible adverse reactions to gel and one to HES.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the CIs were wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.

Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume. However doubts remain as to which colloid is best. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Specialised Register (searched 1 Dec 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2011, issue 4 (The Cochrane Library); MEDLINE (Ovid) (1948 to November Week 3 2011); EMBASE (Ovid) (1974 to 2011 Week 47); ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (1970 to 1 Dec 2011); ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (1990 to 1 Dec 2011); CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to 1 Dec 2011); National Research Register (2007, Issue 1) and PubMed (searched 1 Dec 2011). Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched, and for the initial version of the review drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information (1999).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. The outcomes sought were death, amount of whole blood transfused, and incidence of adverse reactions.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety trials, with a total of 5678 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Quality of allocation concealment was judged to be adequate in 35 trials and poor or uncertain in the rest.Deaths were obtained in 61 trials. For albumin or PPF versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 32 trials (n = 1769) reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.07 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.32). When the trials by Boldt were removed from the analysis the pooled RR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.20). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin, nine trials (n = 824) reported mortality. The RR was 0.89 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.21). Removing the study by Boldt from the analysis did not change the RR or confidence intervals. For albumin or PPF versus Dextran four trials (n = 360) reported mortality. The RR was 3.75 (95% CI 0.42 to 33.09). For gelatin versus HES 25 trials (n = 1756) reported mortality and the RR was 1.03 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.26). When the trials by Boldt were removed from the analysis the pooled RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.27). RR was not estimable in the gelatin versus dextran and HES versus dextran groups.Forty five trials recorded the amount of blood transfused, however quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Twenty-four trials recorded adverse reactions, with two studies reporting possible adverse reactions to Gel and one to HES.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.

Postoperative hypoproteinemia in cancer patients following extensive abdominal surgery despite parenteral nutritional support

Determination of the predictors of hypoproteinemia among cancer patients following extensive surgery may enhance their nutritional management and clinical outcome. This study evaluated the predictive factors of postoperative hypoproteinemia among cancer patients following extensive abdominal surgery. An age- and gender-matched case-control study (n = 115) was conducted among cancer patients undergoing extensive (cases; n = 81) and moderate (controls; n = 34) abdominal surgery. Case patients received total parenteral nutrition (TPN), including 3 units of fresh frozen plasma and 200 mL 5% human albumin solution, for 8 postoperative days (POD). Case patients had lower mean total serum protein (TSP) levels throughout POD 8 (F value = 13.81; P = 0.001). Despite TPN, cases had greatest mean (±SD) TSP percent change on POD 1 (-24.6% ± 13.0, vs. -12.6% ± 9.2; P < 0.0001) and did not regain preoperative levels (POD 8: -14.3% ± 12.5 vs. 6.9% ± 13.4; P = 0.006). The likelihood of hypoproteinemia in this group was greatest on POD 3 (OR = 30.57; 95% CI 5.44-171.83). Multivariate regression analyses indicated that the determinants of postoperative hypoproteinemia were age [Adjusted OR (AOR) = 1.04; 95% CI 1.00-1.08), preoperative TSP (AOR = 0.46; 95% CI 0.23-0.92), and extensive surgery (AOR = 2.65; 95% CI 1.01-6.95). Tailored nutritional support, regarding extent of surgery, preoperative TSP, and patient age are needed to deter the occurrence of postoperative hypoproteinemia and consequent adverse surgical outcome among cancer patients.

Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume. However doubts remain as to which colloid is best. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's specialised register, CENTRAL (2007, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1994 to March 2007), EMBASE (1974 to March 2007), and the National Research Register (2007, Issue 1). Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched, and drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information. The search was last updated in March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement. The outcomes measured were death, amount of whole blood transfused, and incidence of adverse reactions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy trials, with a total of 4375 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Quality of allocation concealment was judged to be adequate in 24 trials and poor or uncertain in the rest.Deaths were obtained in 46 trials. For albumin or PPF versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 25 trials (n = 1234) reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.14 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.43). When the trials by Boldt are removed from the analysis the pooled RR was 0.97 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.35). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin, seven trials (n = 636) reported mortality. The RR was 0.97 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.39). For albumin or PPF versus Dextran four trials (n = 360) reported mortality. The RR was 3.75 (95% CI 0.42 to 33.09). For gelatin versus HES 18 trials (n = 1337) reported mortality and RR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.25). RR was not estimable in the gelatin versus dextran and HES versus dextran groups.Thirty-seven trials recorded the amount of blood transfused, however quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Nineteen trials recorded adverse reactions, but none occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) versus other fluid therapies: effects on kidney function

BACKGROUND

Hydroxyethyl starches (HES) are synthetic colloids commonly used for fluid resuscitation, yet controversy exists about their impact on kidney function.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of HES on kidney function compared to other fluid resuscitation therapies in different patient populations.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, MetaRegister and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which HES was compared to an alternate fluid therapy for the prevention or treatment of effective intravascular volume depletion. Primary outcomes were renal replacement therapy (RRT), author-defined kidney failure and acute kidney injury (AKI) as defined by the RIFLE criteria. Secondary outcomes included serum creatinine and creatinine clearance.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Screening, selection, data extraction and quality assessments for each retrieved article were carried out by two authors using standardised forms. Authors were contacted when published data were incomplete. Preplanned sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed after data were analysed with a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 34 studies (2607 patients). Overall, the RR of author-defined kidney failure was 1.50 (95% CI 1.20 to 1.87; n = 1199) and 1.38 for requiring RRT (95% CI 0.89 to 2.16; n = 1236) in HES treated individuals compared with other fluid therapies. Subgroup analyses suggested increased risk in septic patients compared to non-septic (surgical/trauma) patients. Non-septic patient studies were smaller and had lower event rates, so subgroup differences may have been due to lack of statistical power in these studies. Only limited data was obtained for analysis of kidney outcomes by the RIFLE criteria. Overall, methodological quality of studies was good but subjective outcomes were potentially biased because most studies were unblinded.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Potential for increased risk of AKI should be considered when weighing the risks and benefits of HES for volume resuscitation, particularly in septic patients. Large studies with adequate follow-up are required to evaluate the renal safety of HES products in non-septic patient populations. RIFLE criteria should be applied to evaluate kidney function in future studies of HES and, where data is available, to re-analyse those studies already published. There is inadequate clinical data to address the claim that safety differences exist between different HES products.

Effects of a predominantly hydroxyethyl starch (HES)-based and a predominantly non HES-based fluid therapy on renal function in surgical ICU patients

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of predominantly hydroxyethyl starch (HES 6% 130/0.4)-based with predominantly gelatin 4%-based fluid therapy on renal function in surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

Before-after, retrospective, study of surgical ICU patients. All patients admitted from January to June 2005 formed the HES group, with HES 130/0.4 as the standard colloid of choice. All patients admitted from January to June 2006 formed the GEL group, with gelatin 4% as the primary colloid. Acute renal failure (ARF) was defined as new need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) or at least a two-fold increase in baseline creatinine.

RESULTS

There were 1383 patients in the HES group and 1528 in the GEL group; 118 and 87, in each group respectively, had severe sepsis. The incidence of ARF and ICU and hospital mortality rates were similar in the two groups. In a post-hoc multivariable analysis, cumulative doses >33 ml/kg of either HES (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.01-3.41, p < 0.001) or gelatin (OR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.05-3.79, p = 0.035) were associated with a higher risk of ARF.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of ARF was similar in patients who received predominantly HES (6% 130/.04) fluid therapy and in those who received predominantly gelatin 4%. Moderate cumulative doses of modern HES or gelatin solutions may be associated with a higher risk of ARF.

Interventions for protecting renal function in the perioperative period

BACKGROUND

A number of methods have been used to try to protect kidney function in patients undergoing surgery. These include the administration of dopamine and its analogues, diuretics, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and hydration fluids.

OBJECTIVES

For this review, we selected randomized controlled trials which employed different methods to protect renal function during the perioperative period. In examining these trials, we looked at outcomes that included renal failure and mortality as well as changes in renal function tests, such as urine output, creatinine clearance, free water clearance, fractional excretion of sodium and renal plasma flow.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to June, 2007), and EMBASE (1988 to June, 2007); and handsearched six journals (Anesthesia and Analgesia, Anesthesiology, Annals of Surgery, British Journal of Anaesthesia, Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, and Journal of Vascular Surgery).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomized controlled trials in adults undergoing surgery where a treatment measure was used for the purpose of renal protection in the perioperative period.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We selected 53 studies for inclusion in this review. As well as data analysis from all the studies, we performed subgroup analysis for type of intervention, type of surgical procedure, and pre-existing renal dysfunction. We undertook sensitivity analysis on studies with high and moderately good methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included data from 53 studies, comprising a total of 2327 participants. Of these, 1293 received some form of treatment and 1034 acted as controls. The interventions mostly consisted of different pharmaceutical agents, such as dopamine and its analogues, diuretics, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, or selected hydration fluids. The results indicated that certain interventions showed minimal benefits. All the results suffered from significant heterogeneity. Hence we cannot draw conclusions about the effectiveness of these interventions in protecting patients' kidneys during surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no reliable evidence from the available literature to suggest that interventions during surgery can protect the kidneys from damage. There is a need for more studies with high methodological quality. One particular area for further study may be patients with pre-existing renal dysfunction undergoing surgery.

Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume. However doubts remain as to which colloid is best. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group specialised register, CENTRAL (2007, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1994 to March 2007), EMBASE (1974 to March 2007), and the National Research Register (2007, issue 1). Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched, and drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information. The search was last updated in March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement. The outcomes measured were death, amount of whole blood transfused, and incidence of adverse reactions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy trials, with a total of 4375 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Quality of allocation concealment was judged to be adequate in 24 trials and poor or uncertain in the rest. Deaths were obtained in 46 trials. For albumin or PPF versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 25 trials (n = 1234) reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.14 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.43). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin, seven trials (n = 636) reported mortality. The RR was 0.97 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.39). For albumin or PPF versus Dextran four trials (n = 360) reported mortality. The RR was 3.75 (95% CI 0.42 to 33.09). For gelatin versus HES 18 trials (n = 1337) reported mortality and RR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.25). RR was not estimable in the gelatin versus dextran and HES versus dextran groups.Thirty-seven trials recorded the amount of blood transfused, however quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Nineteen trials recorded adverse reactions, but none occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.

Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis

BACKGROUND

The role of intensive insulin therapy in patients with severe sepsis is uncertain. Fluid resuscitation improves survival among patients with septic shock, but evidence is lacking to support the choice of either crystalloids or colloids.

METHODS

In a multicenter, two-by-two factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients with severe sepsis to receive either intensive insulin therapy to maintain euglycemia or conventional insulin therapy and either 10% pentastarch, a low-molecular-weight hydroxyethyl starch (HES 200/0.5), or modified Ringer's lactate for fluid resuscitation. The rate of death at 28 days and the mean score for organ failure were coprimary end points.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped early for safety reasons. Among 537 patients who could be evaluated, the mean morning blood glucose level was lower in the intensive-therapy group (112 mg per deciliter [6.2 mmol per liter]) than in the conventional-therapy group (151 mg per deciliter [8.4 mmol per liter], P<0.001). However, at 28 days, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of death or the mean score for organ failure. The rate of severe hypoglycemia (glucose level, < or = 40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter]) was higher in the intensive-therapy group than in the conventional-therapy group (17.0% vs. 4.1%, P<0.001), as was the rate of serious adverse events (10.9% vs. 5.2%, P=0.01). HES therapy was associated with higher rates of acute renal failure and renal-replacement therapy than was Ringer's lactate.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of intensive insulin therapy placed critically ill patients with sepsis at increased risk for serious adverse events related to hypoglycemia. As used in this study, HES was harmful, and its toxicity increased with accumulating doses. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00135473.)

Perioperative fluid management in renal transplantation: a narrative review of the literature

Adequate volume maintenance is essential to prevent acute renal failure during major surgery or to ensure graft function after renal transplantation. The various recommendations on the optimum fluid therapy are based, at best, on sparse evidence only from observational studies. This article reviews the literature on perioperative fluid management in renal transplantation. Crystalloid solutions not exerting any specific side-effects are the first choice for volume replacement in kidney transplantation. The use of colloids should be restricted to patients with severe intravascular volume deficits necessitating high volume restoration. The routine application of albumin, dopamine, and high dose diuretics is no longer warranted. Mannitol given immediately before removal of the vessel clamps reduces the requirement of post-transplant dialysis, but has no effects on graft function in the long term. There is insufficient evidence on the best use of dialysis, but it seems peritoneal dialysis pretransplant is associated with less delayed graft function, whereas the preference of dialysis post-transplant is not yet well-founded. This review article should provide better guidance for fluid management in kidney transplantation until best-evidence guidelines can be established based upon more research.

Calcium supplementation of saline-based colloids does not produce equivalent coagulation profiles to similarly balanced salt preparations

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that calcium alone does not account for the observed coagulation differences between saline-based and balanced electrolyte IV fluid preparations.

DESIGN

Controlled, nonblinded, in vitro observational study.

SETTING

University-based anesthesia research laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten healthy volunteers.

INTERVENTIONS

The volunteers donated fresh blood for in vitro 40% and 60% dilution with 6 intravenous fluid preparations (lactated Ringer's solution, human albumin solution, and 4 hydroxyethyl starch preparations). All saline-based fluids were supplemented with calcium chloride to obtain ionized concentrations >or=1.0 mmol/L.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

After dilution of the fresh blood with the study fluids, samples were analyzed by using the Thrombelastograph. Three colloid preparations produced minimal coagulation derangement, even at 60% dilution (human albumin solution, tetrastarch in saline, and pentastarch in balanced electrolyte solution), whereas pentastarch in saline and hetastarch in balanced electrolyte produced a mildly hypocoagulable state at 60% dilution.

CONCLUSIONS

The different coagulation profiles between the 2 pentastarch preparations, as well as similar profiles of pentastarch in saline and hetastarch in balanced electrolyte solution, suggest that calcium is not solely responsible for previously observed effects.

The effects of colloid solutions on hemostasis

PURPOSE

Colloid solutions are widely used to prevent or to correct hypovolemia in surgical patients. Although more efficacious than crystalloids, they are more expensive and can be associated with adverse effects, in particular when they interfere with the hemostatic system.

METHODS

This narrative review focuses on the effects of albumin and synthetic colloids on the biological markers of coagulation and their clinical consequences.

RESULTS

All colloidal plasma substitutes interfere with the physiological mechanisms of hemostasis either through a non-specific effect correlated to the degree of hemodilution or through specific actions of these macromolecules on platelet function, coagulation proteins, and the fibrinolytic system. Albumin has the least effect, while high molecular weight (Mw) dextrans and hydroxyethyl starches (HES) have the most significant effects. Gelatins and medium Mw HES with a low molar substitution ratio have moderate and, probably, comparable effects. The use of dextrans and high in vivo Mw HES may be associated with increased bleeding, while gelatins and low in vivo Mw HES are unlikely to have such an effect.

CONCLUSIONS

In most cases, the clinical consequences of the biological effects of colloids on hemostasis are limited, provided that safety considerations are observed (maximum daily dosage, duration of treatment, patient's hemostatic status, clinical conditions). The implications may be different in patients with hemostatic disorders, either inherited or related to preoperative antiplatelet or anticoagulant treatment. In these patients, crystalloids, gelatins or even albumin solutions should be preferred when hemodilution exceeds 30% of the circulating blood volume.

A Head-to-Head Comparison of the In Vitro Coagulation Effects of Saline-Based and Balanced Electrolyte Crystalloid and Colloid Intravenous Fluids

Both fluid composition (e.g., type of hydroxyethyl starch) and formulation (e.g., saline or balanced salt carrier solution) may alter whole blood coagulation. We therefore enrolled 10 healthy volunteers to test ex vivo, thrombelastograph-based blood coagulation differences of eight crystalloid and colloid solutions at 20%, 40%, and 60% dilutions. Saline and lactated Ringer's solution produced a hypercoagulable state at 20%-40% dilutions. Saline, hetastarch in saline, pentastarch in saline, tetrastarch in saline, and human albumin solutions all produced a hypocoagulable state at 60% dilution. Hetastarch in saline also produced a hypocoagulable state at 40% dilution. The larger molecular weight starches produced more intense coagulation abnormalities than the medium molecular weight compounds formulated similarly (i.e., suspended in saline or balanced salt solution). The balanced salt solutions caused fewer coagulation abnormalities, especially pentastarch in balanced salt solution. This balanced salt pentastarch preparation produced the least derangement of coagulation of the colloid solutions at all dilutions, causing hypercoagulability at the lower dilutions and minimal coagulation derangement at 60% dilution. These data support the theory that smaller molecular weight hydroxyethyl starches and colloids suspended in balanced salt solutions preserve coagulation better than large molecular weight starches and saline-based colloids, as judged by thrombelastography.

Albumin induced hypercoagulability does not reduce blood loss in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Albumin may enhance and hydroxyethyl starch (HES) may impair haemostasis. While the effects are also dependent on haemodilution we minimized it by early structured transfusion therapy, and compared albumin and HES regarding blood loss and coagulation parameters in hip arthroplasty patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

101 patients undergoing primary hip arthroplasty received in random order 4% albumin (n = 48) or HES (average Mw 120 kDa/molar substitution ratio 0.7, n = 53). The administration of colloid, red blood cell (RBC), fresh frozen plasma and platetet concentrates begun after a 6-8%, 12-16%, 60% and 100% blood loss of the patient's calculated blood volume respectively. Explanatory risk factors for blood loss were modelled by regression analysis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Administration of albumin or HES 1200 ml (500-2000 and 500-1800) [median (range) respectively] did not affect blood loss. The vWF antigen was higher in the albumin group (p = 0.04) postoperatively. Haematocrit value, platelet count, bleeding time, prothrombin time value, activated thromboplastin time, FV activity and fibrinogen concentration were comparable between the groups. Long operation time was associated with great blood loss (p < 0.001). In hip arthroplasty patients with near normal levels of haematocrit albumin enhanced coagulation without altering blood loss.

Interventions for protecting renal function in the perioperative period

BACKGROUND

A number of methods have been used to try to protect kidney function in patients undergoing surgery. These include the administration of dopamine, diuretics, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and hydration fluids.

OBJECTIVES

For this review, we selected randomized controlled trials, which employed different methods to protect renal function during the perioperative period. In examining these trials, we looked at outcomes such as renal failure and mortality, as well as changes in the renal function tests, including urine output, creatinine clearance, free water clearance, fractional excretion of sodium and renal plasma flow.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004) and EMBASE (1988 to 2004) and hand searched six journals (British Journal of Anaesthesia; Anesthesia and Analgesia; Anesthesiology; Annals of Surgery; Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery and Journal of Vascular Surgery).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomized controlled trials in adult population undergoing surgery where a treatment measure was used for the purpose of renal protection in the perioperative period.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We selected 37 studies for inclusion in this review. As well as analysis of the data from all the studies, we also performed subgroup analysis for type of interventions, types of surgical procedures and those with pre-existing renal dysfunction. We undertook sensitivity analysis on studies with high methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included data from 37 studies, comprising a total of 1227 patients. Of these, 658 received some form of treatment and 569 acted as controls. The interventions were mostly employing different pharmaceutical agents such as dopamine, diuretics, calcium channel blockers. ACE inhibitors or selected hydration fluids. The results indicated that certain interventions showed some benefits, but all the results suffered from significant heterogeneity. Hence we can draw no conclusions about the effectiveness of these interventions in protecting the kidneys during surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no reliable evidence from available literature to suggest that interventions during surgery can protect the kidneys from damage. However, there is a need for more studies of high methodological quality. One particular area for further studies may be on patients with pre-existing renal dysfunction undergoing surgery.

Effect of intravenous hydroxyethyl starch on the accuracy of measuring hemoglobin concentration

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine if intravenous hydroxyethylstarch (HES) affects the accuracy of hemoglobin (Hb) measurements, as artificial colloids are known to increase red blood cell sedimentation rates.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care academic medical institution.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

We randomized 40 surgical American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II patients undergoing preoperative autologous blood donation before elective orthopedic surgery. Patients were randomized to receive volume replacement with 500 mL of 6% HES 200,000/0.5 or 500 mL of electrolyte solution. Measurements of Hb concentration and leukocyte count were performed using an analyzer with a suction needle sampling from the bottom of the test tube. Measurements were performed after mixing and repeated after a 10-minute period of upright positioning of the tube (at rest).

MAIN RESULTS

In the study group that received HES, Hb levels were increased above baseline after resting (mean increase to 151% of baseline values, P < .01), whereas the leukocyte count was decreased (mean decrease to 39% of baseline values, P < .01). No difference between baseline and resting measurements were observed in patients who received intravenous crystalloids. In addition, we repeatedly measured the Hb concentration in an unstirred tube with and without the addition of HES. In blood samples containing HES, the Hb concentration was increased above baseline after 2.5 minutes of resting, compared with 30 minutes without HES addition (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Mixing of test tube contents before sampling is critical for accurate measurement of the Hb concentration in the blood of patients who received intravenous HES.

Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Colloids are widely used in the replacement of fluid volume. However doubts remain as to which colloid is best. Different colloids vary in their molecular weight and therefore in the length of time they remain in the circulatory system. Because of this and their other characteristics, they may differ in their safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different colloid solutions in patients thought to need volume replacement.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group specialised register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (2002 Issue 3), MEDLINE (1994-2002/07), EMBASE (1974-2002 August week 1), and the National Research Register (2002 issue 3). Bibliographies of trials retrieved were searched, and drug companies manufacturing colloids were contacted for information. The search was last updated in September 2002.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing colloid solutions in critically ill and surgical patients thought to need volume replacement. The main outcomes measured were death, amount of whole blood transfused, and incidence of adverse reactions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-seven trials met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 3659 participants. Quality of allocation concealment was judged to be adequate in 20 trials and poor or uncertain in 37. Deaths were obtained from 36 trials. For albumin or PPF versus hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 20 trials (n=1029) reported mortality. The pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.17 (95% CI 0.91, 1.50). For albumin or PPF versus gelatin four trials (n=542) reported mortality. The RR was 0.99 (0.69, 1.42). For gelatin vs HES 11 trials (n=945) reported mortality, RR was 1.00 (0.78,1.28). RR was not estimable in the albumin vs dextran, gelatin vs dextran, and HES vs dextran groups. Thirty-six trials recorded the amount of blood transfused, however quantitative analysis was not possible due to skewness and variable reporting. Fifteen trials recorded adverse reactions, but none occurred.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

From this review, there is no evidence that one colloid solution is more effective or safe than any other, although the confidence intervals are wide and do not exclude clinically significant differences between colloids. Larger trials of fluid therapy are needed if clinically significant differences in mortality are to be detected or excluded.

[Effects of plasma substitutes on hemostasis]

OBJECTIVE

Data synthesis on haemostasis effects of cristalloids and colloids and clinical implications for their use for plasma volume replacement.

DATA SOURCES

Data were searched in the Medline database from 1954 to 2000 using the following key-words: cristalloids, colloids, albumin, gelatin, dextran, hydroxyethyl starch, haemostasis, von Willebrand disease, haemodilution.

DATA EXTRACTION

Publications from 1954 to 1990 were selected depending on the quality of their methodology. Most of articles published after 1990 and all types including case report were accepted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Cristalloids induces a moderate hypercoagulable state with 10 to 30% haemodilution. Hypocoagulation is observed above 50% haemodilution. Albumin does not impair hemostasis except with a 50% or more haemodilution where hypocoagulation is observed. Dextran dramatically impairs haemostasis and fibrinolysis. With increasing dose, a progressive decrease of all von Willebrand multimers, mostly the largest, is observed. Till 50% haemodilution, gelatin has a moderate impact on hemostasis, but platelet aggregation is moderately modified. However this moderate impairment of haemostasis may potentiate the haemostatic effect of other colloids when used in association with gelatin. More than 30% haemodilution with hydroxyethyl starch (HES) has a serious effect in vitro on platelet function and fibrinoformation. In most studies in human, less than 20 ml.kg-1 plasma volume replacement has no clinical impact, but in some evaluations postoperative bleeding is more important with HES, particularly HES 450, in comparison to other colloids. With HES 450 and HES 200 highly substituted (0.6 of degree of substitution) intravascular cumulation of large molecules leads to type I von Willebrand syndrome when doses overtake 80 ml.kg-1. Dextran and HES are prohibited in patients with impaired haemostasis due to congenital disease (haemophilia and von Willebrand disease) or acquired defect (thrombocytopenia). Caution is required in patients with renal failure or receiving antithrombotic or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents. Patients without a haemorrhagic diathesis must not received more than 1.5 g.kg-1.j-1 of dextran and restrictive conditions of use must be respected with HES.

CONCLUSION

Except isotonic cristalloids, all colloids induce haemostastic changes particularly for haemodilution over 30%. Effects are more pronounced with HES and dextran.

Pentastarch as partial replacement fluid for therapeutic plasma exchange: effect on plasma proteins, adverse events during treatment, and serum ionized calcium

We compared the safety, effect on plasma proteins, and contribution to hypocalcemic toxicity of 10% pentastarch vs. 5% albumin in plasma exchange. Thirty-two neurology patients underwent 161 plasma exchange procedures. Subjects were randomized to receive either 10% pentastarch (n = 17) or 5% albumin (n = 15) as the first (1/2) of colloid replacement. The second (1/2) of colloid replacement was 5% albumin in all cases. NaCl (plus small amounts of ACD-A) accounted for (1/4) of the total return fluid. Mean total exchange volume was 3,842.6 +/- 450 ml. Hemoglobin, platelet count, coagulation parameters, and plasma fibrinogen were similar between the two groups at the outset of plasma exchange and at the time of the last (4th or 5th) procedure of the series. Immunoglobulin levels were equivalent at the outset and were reduced by plasma exchange to the same extent in the two groups. Serum albumin concentration fell significantly faster in the group receiving pentastarch. On the other hand, serum calcium, corrected for the albumin concentration, fell significantly further in the control group than in the group receiving pentastarch. Mean serum ionized calcium fell approximately 25 % in procedures using only albumin but only approximately 16% when pentastarch was used (P < 0.0001). This was reflected in the occurrence of hypocalcemic toxicity in 33.3% of procedures performed using only albumin but in only 8.1% of those using pentastarch (P = 0.0002). Pentastarch may be suitable for partial colloid replacement in plasma exchange and would have saved our hospital $127,050 to $434,280 in 1998 if used in all procedures.