ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2018
Starch Wars-New Episodes of the Saga. Changes in Regulations on Hydroxyethyl Starch in the European Union.
Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of a portable sealed positive pressure infusion device in a porcine model of hemorrhagic shock.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The influence of fluid resuscitation strategy on outcomes from dengue shock syndrome: a review of the management of 691 children in 7 Southeast Asian hospitals.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Analysis of hemodynamics and impedance using bioelectrical impedance analysis in hypovolemic shock-induced swine model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A Critical Reassessment of the Kidney Risk Caused by Tetrastarch Products in the Perioperative and Intensive Care Environments.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Hydroxyethyl Starch Improves the Prognosis of Rats with Traumatic Shock via Activation of the ERK Signaling Pathway in Lymphocytes.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- Colloids Yes or No? - a "Gretchen Question" Answered.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
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.