Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Mar 19;19(1):92.
doi: 10.1186/s13054-015-0833-9.

Hydroxyethyl starch versus other fluids for non-septic patients in the intensive care unit: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Bin He  1 , Bo Xu  2 , Xiaoxing Xu  3 , Lixia Li  4 , Rongrong Ren  5 , Zhiyu Chen  6 , Jian Xiao  7 , Yingwei Wang  8 , Bin Xu  9
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Hydroxyethyl starch versus other fluids for non-septic patients in the intensive care unit: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Bin He et al. Crit Care. .

Abstract

Introduction: Use of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) in septic patients is reported to increase the mortality and incidence of renal replacement therapy (RRT). However, whether or not use of HES would induce the same result in non-septic patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) remains unclear. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate 6% HES versus other fluids for non-septic ICU patients.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched from Pubmed, OvidSP, Embase database and Cochrane Library, published before November, 2013. A meta-analysis was made on the effect of 6% HES versus other fluids for non-septic ICU patients, including mortality, RRT incidence, bleeding volume, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion and fluid application for non-septic patients in ICU.

Results: Twenty-two RCTs were included, involving 6,064 non-septic ICU patients. Compared with the other fluids, 6% HES was not associated with decreased overall mortality (RR = 1.03, 95%CI: 0.09 to 1.17; P = 0.67; I(2) = 0). There was no significant difference in RRT incidence, bleeding volume and red blood cell transfusion between 6% HES group and the other fluid groups. However, patients in HES group received less total intravenous fluids than those receiving crystalloids during the first day in ICU (SMD = -0.84; 95%CI: -1.39 to -0.30; P = 0.003, I(2) = 74%).

Conclusions: This meta-analysis found no increased mortality, RRT incidence, bleeding volumes or RBC transfusion in non-septic ICU patients, but the sample sizes were small and the studies generally were of poor quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of this meta-analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of pooled risk ratio for overall mortality. HES, hydroxethyl starch. M-H, Mantel-Haenszel.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Funnel plot of overall mortality. RR, relative risk. SE, standard error.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of pooled risk ratio for use of renal replacement therapy. HES, hydroxethyl starch. M-H, Mantel-Haenszel.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Funnel plot of incidence for renal replacement therapy. RR, relative risk. SE, standard error.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Forest plots of pooled estimates for bleeding volume and red blood cell transfusion. (A) Bleeding volume after surgery. (B) Red blood cell transfusion (unit). HES, hydroxethyl starch. IV, Inverse Variance.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Forest plots of pooled estimates for fluid application (mL) during the first day in the ICU. (A) Hydroxethyl starch (HES) versus crystalloid. (B) HES versus gelatin. (C) HES versus albumin. IV, Inverse Variance.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Finfer S, Liu B, Taylor C, Bellomo R, Billot L, Cook D, et al. Resuscitation fluid use in critically ill adults: an international cross-sectional study in 391 intensive care units. Crit Care. 2010;14:R185. doi: 10.1186/cc9293. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. McIlroy DR, Kharasch ED. Acute intravascular volume expansion with rapidly administered crystalloid or colloid in the setting of moderate hypovolemia. Anesth Analg. 2003;96:1572–7. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000061460.59320.B0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Westphal M, James MF, Kozek-Langenecker S, Stocker R, Guidet B, Van Aken H. Hydroxyethyl starches: different products–different effects. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:187–202. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181a7ec82. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Niemi TT, Miyashita R, Yamakage M. Colloid solutions: a clinical update. J Anesth. 2010;24:913–25. doi: 10.1007/s00540-010-1034-y. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, Meier-Hellmann A, Ragaller M, Weiler N, et al. Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:125–39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070716. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources