In vivo effects of balanced, low molecular 6% and 10% hydroxyethyl starch compared with crystalloid volume replacement on the coagulation system in major pancreatic surgery-a sub-analysis of a prospective double-blinded, randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background: The outcome of patients undergoing major surgery treated with HES for hemodynamic optimization is unclear. This post-hoc analysis of a randomized clinical pilot trial investigated the impact of low-molecular balanced HES solutions on the coagulation system, blood loss and transfusion requirements.

Methods: The Trial was registered: EudraCT 2008-004175-22 and ethical approval was provided by the ethics committee of Berlin. Patients were randomized into three groups receiving either a 10% HES 130/0.42 solution, a 6% HES 130/0.42 solution or a crystalloid following a goal-directed hemodynamic algorithm. Endpoints were parameters of standard and viscoelastic coagulation laboratory, blood loss and transfusion requirements at baseline, at the end of surgery (EOS) and the first postoperative day (POD 1).

Results: Fifty-two patients were included in the analysis (HES 10% (n = 15), HES 6% (n = 17) and crystalloid (n = 20)). Fibrinogen decreased in all groups at EOS (HES 10% 338 [298;378] to 192 [163;234] mg dl-1, p<0.01, HES 6% 385 [302;442] to 174 [163;224] mg dl-1, p<0.01, crystalloids 408 [325;458] to 313 [248;370] mg dl-1, p = 0.01). MCF FIBTEM was decreased for both HES groups at EOS (HES 10%: 20.5 [16.0;24.8] to 6.5 [5.0;10.8] mm, p = <0.01; HES 6% 27.0 [18.8;35.2] to 7.0 [5.0;19.0] mm, p = <0.01). These changes did not persist on POD 1 for HES 10% (rise to 16.0 [13.0;24.0] mm, p = 0.88). Blood loss was not different in the groups nor transfusion requirements.

Conclusion: Our data suggest a stronger but transient effect of balanced, low-molecular HES on the coagulation system. Despite the decline of the use of artificial colloids in clinical practice, these results may help to inform clinicians who use HES solutions.

Fig 1. Consort flow diagram.

Neither basic patient characteristics nor indication for surgery showed any significant differences between the study groups. Basic intraoperative data including volumes of study drugs and fluid requirements were not different between the groups (Table 1).

Fig 2. ROTEM.

CT = clotting time, MCF = maximum clot firmness, HES = hydroxyethyl starch, a: p<0.05 vs. baseline, b: p<0.05 vs. end of surgery, c: p< 0.05 vs. crystalloid, d: p< 0.05 vs. HES 6%.