Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23885279›Full record

SynthesisDeutsches Arzteblatt international2013

Fluid replacement with hydroxyethyl starch in critical care--a reassessment.

Christiane S Hartog, Tobias Welte, Peter Schlattmann, Konrad Reinhart

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Understanding the Harms of HES: A Review of the Evidence to Date.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2019
    Review
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Hydroxyeyhyl starch: Controversies revisited.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology · 2014
    Review
  8. [Cardiovascular and hemostaseological view of retinal vascular occlusions].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2014
    Review
  9. In reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2013
    Article
  10. Studies are carried out in hospitals.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2013
    Article
  11. Methodological issues of the studies cited.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2013
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christiane S HartogDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine and Integrated Research and Treatment Center for Sepsis Control and Care, Jena University Hospital, Germany.
Tobias Welte
Peter Schlattmann
Konrad Reinhart
Jena University Hospital · DEDeutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin · DEUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHydroxyethyl starch (HES) is used for fluid replacement in millions of patients around the world every year, yet it has been found to have adverse effects that have a negative impact on patient survival. Recent clinical trials with a modern HES solution (HES 130) and meta-analyses now enable a reassessment of its risks and benefits.

methodsOn the basis of a selective literature search focusing on reports of the use of HES 130/0.4 and HES 130/0.42 in sepsis, trauma, and intensive care medicine, data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are presented, and up-to-date meta-analyses and reviews are discussed. Moreover, the authors conducted an independent meta-analysis of HES 130 in comparison to crystalloids or albumin in intensive care medicine, sepsis, and trauma.

resultsSeven RCTs were evaluated, involving a total of 7838 patients treated for sepsis or trauma, or in intensive care. HES 130 was associated with a higher cumulative risk of death (relative risk [RR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.20), more frequent need for a renal replacement procedure (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08-1.46), and more frequent need for blood transfusion (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37). There was no patient-relevant benefit. Four recent meta-analyses of data from a total of more than 10 000 patients confirmed these concerns about the safety of HES in general and, in particular, of low-molecular-weight HES 130 for patients in intensive care. The safety of 6% HES 130 in the immediate perioperative period has not been adequately demonstrated. DISCUSSION: Because of safety concerns, fluid replacement with HES in critically ill patients cannot be recommended. Evidence for its superior efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness in preoperative use is also lacking.

Indexed as

AlbuminsCritical CareCritical IllnessCrystalloid SolutionsEvidence-Based MedicineFluid TherapyHumansHydroxyethyl Starch DerivativesIsotonic SolutionsPlasma SubstitutesRisk FactorsSepsisSurvival AnalysisSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeWounds and InjuriesAlbuminsCrystalloid SolutionsHydroxyethyl Starch DerivativesIsotonic SolutionsPlasma Substitutes

Identifiers

PMID23885279
PMCPMC3719450
OpenAlexW2156934028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.