SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2015
Safety evaluation on low-molecular-weight hydroxyethyl starch for volume expansion therapy in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preventing pediatric acute kidney injury: is it even possible?Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Review
- Balanced Hydroxyethylstarch (HES 130/0.4) Impairs Kidney Function In-Vivo without Inflammation.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHydroxyethyl starch (HES) has been widely used for volume expansion, but its safety in adult patients has been questioned recently. The aim of this meta-analysis is to see whether or not HES has any adverse effect in pediatric patients.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving pediatric patients who received 6% low-molecular-weight HES, published before January 2014, were searched for in Pubmed, Embase database and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently extracted the valid data, including the mortality, renal function, coagulation, blood loss, hemodynamic changes, and length of hospital and ICU stay. All data were analyzed by I (2)-test, and the results of statistical analysis were displayed in forest plots. Possible publication bias was tested by funnel plots. Bayesian analysis was performed using WinBUGS with fixed and random effects models.
resultsA total of 13 RCTs involving 1,156 pediatric patients were finally included in this meta-analysis. Compared with other fluids, HES did not significantly decrease the mortality (RR = -0.01; 95%CI: 0.05 to 0.03; P = 0.54; I(2) = 6%), creatinine level (I(2) -test: MD = 1.81; 95%CI: -0.35 to 3.98; P = 0.10;I(2) = 0%; Bayesian analysis: Fixed effect model MD = 1.77; 95%CI: -0.07 to 3.6; Random effects model MD = 1.78; 95%CI: -1.86 to 5.33), activated partial thromboplastin time (MD = 0.01; 95%CI: -1.05 to 1.07; P = 0.99; I(2) = 42%), and blood loss (MD = 17.72; 95%CI: -41.27 to 5.82; P = 0.10; I(2) = 0%) in pediatric patients. However, HES significantly decreased the blood platelet count (MD = 20.99; 95%CI: -32.08 to -9.90; P = 0.0002; I(2) = 28%) and increased the length of ICU stay (MD = 0.94; 95%CI: 0.18 to 1.70; P = 0.02; I(2) = 46%).
conclusionsVolume expansion with 6% HES significantly decreased the platelet count and increased the length of ICU stay, also might have an adverse effect on renal function. Therefore HES is not recommended for pediatric patients, which safety needs more high quality RCTs and studies to confirm in future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.