ReviewTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2019
Understanding the Harms of HES: A Review of the Evidence to Date.
Review in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors and clinical outcomes of acute kidney injury after thoracic surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Colloids Yes or No? - a "Gretchen Question" Answered.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
- Clinical Trials in Volume Resuscitation with Hydroxyethyl Starch: Focus on Risk of Bias.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2020Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intravenous (IV) fluid resuscitation is one of the most common interventions in intensive care medicine. Despite clear guidelines, the choice of IV fluid is largely dependent on physician preference instead of high-quality evidence of efficacy and safety. This is particularly the case for synthetic colloids, such as hydroxyethyl starch (HES). The use of HES in critical care has been associated with increased rates of acute kidney injury (AKI), renal replacement therapy and mortality. In light of this, current guidelines and scientific and regulatory bodies do not recommend the use of HES for fluid therapy in critical illness and caution against its use in many other settings. Despite this, HES products are still debated and used. Awareness of the indications, contraindications, doses, benefits and adverse effects for IV fluids, as well as recommendations from scientific and regulatory bodies, is essential to guarantee patients' safety. Poor awareness of optimal IV fluid therapy has recently been revealed in some countries including Turkey. Therefore, we provide a review of fluids used for resuscitation, discuss safety data and adverse effects of HES, such as increased AKI and mortality, and discuss recent updates from scientific and regulatory bodies in order to raise awareness of fluid therapy. We conclude that given the lack of a clear benefit of HES in any clinical setting and the availability of safer alternatives, such as crystalloids and albumin, HES should be avoided.
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.