Dataset Information

Effect of Hydroxyethyl Starch vs Saline for Volume Replacement Therapy on Death or Postoperative Complications Among High-Risk Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: The FLASH Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:It is not known if use of colloid solutions containing hydroxyethyl starch (HES) to correct for intravascular deficits in high-risk surgical patients is either effective or safe. Objective:To evaluate the effect of HES 130/0.4 compared with 0.9% saline for intravascular volume expansion on mortality and postoperative complications after major abdominal surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants:Multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial of 775 adult patients at increased risk of postoperative kidney injury undergoing major abdominal surgery at 20 university hospitals in France from February 2016 to July 2018; final follow-up was in October 2018. Interventions:Patients were randomized to receive fluid containing either 6% HES 130/0.4 diluted in 0.9% saline (n?=?389) or 0.9% saline alone (n?=?386) in 250-mL boluses using an individualized hemodynamic algorithm during surgery and for up to 24 hours on the first postoperative day, defined as ending at 7:59 am the following day. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was a composite of death or major postoperative complications at 14 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included predefined postoperative complications within 14 days after surgery, durations of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and all-cause mortality at postoperative days 28 and 90. Results:Among 826 patients enrolled (mean age, 68 [SD, 7] years; 91 women [12%]), 775 (94%) completed the trial. The primary outcome occurred in 139 of 389 patients (36%) in the HES group and 125 of 386 patients (32%) in the saline group (difference, 3.3% [95% CI, -3.3% to 10.0%]; relative risk, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.91-1.34]; P?=?.33). Among 12 prespecified secondary outcomes reported, 11 showed no significant difference, but a statistically significant difference was found in median volume of study fluid administered on day 1: 1250 mL (interquartile range, 750-2000 mL) in the HES group and 1500 mL (interquartile range, 750-2150 mL) in the saline group (median difference, 250 mL [95% CI, 83-417 mL]; P?=?.006). At 28 days after surgery, 4.1% and 2.3% of patients had died in the HES and saline groups, respectively (difference, 1.8% [95% CI, -0.7% to 4.3%]; relative risk, 1.76 [95% CI, 0.79-3.94]; P?=?.17). Conclusions and Relevance:Among patients at risk of postoperative kidney injury undergoing major abdominal surgery, use of HES for volume replacement therapy compared with 0.9% saline resulted in no significant difference in a composite outcome of death or major postoperative complications within 14 days after surgery. These findings do not support the use of HES for volume replacement therapy in such patients. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02502773.

SUBMITTER: Futier E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6990683 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of Hydroxyethyl Starch vs Saline for Volume Replacement Therapy on Death or Postoperative Complications Among High-Risk Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: The FLASH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Futier Emmanuel E Garot Matthias M Godet Thomas T Biais Matthieu M Verzilli Daniel D Ouattara Alexandre A Huet Olivier O Lescot Thomas T Lebuffe Gilles G Dewitte Antoine A Cadic Anna A Restoux Aymeric A Asehnoune Karim K Paugam-Burtz Catherine C Cuvillon Philippe P Faucher Marion M Vaisse Camille C El Amine Younes Y Beloeil Hélène H Leone Marc M Noll Eric E Piriou Vincent V Lasocki Sigismond S Bazin Jean-Etienne JE Pereira Bruno B Jaber Samir S Lasocki Sigismond Huet Olivier Cadic Anna Jacob Christophe Paugam-Burtz Catherine Restoux Aymeric Ouattara Alexandre Feitita Ioana Deloge Elsa Defaye Mylène Joannes-Boyau Olivier Carles Pauline Napolitano Guya Monziols Simon Futier Emmanuel Vignaud Marie Paul Solène Gahbiche Karim Fayon Julie Laroche Erwan Bazin Jean-Etienne Brandely Antoine Le Moal Charlene Lebuffe Gilles Garot Matthias Piriou Vincent Jaber Samir Chanques Gérald Verzilli Daniel De Jong Audrey Millot Alice Castagnoli Anna Leone Marc Pastene Bruno Castelli Caroline Medam Sophie Velly Lionel Vaisse Camille Faucher Marion Asehnoune Karim Samba Esther Roquilly Antoine Le Penndu Marguerite Cuvillon Philippe Yves Lefrant Jean Wira Olivier Dubout Elisabeth Mfam Willy-Serge Lescot Thomas Begneu Emilie Burey Julien Cirilovic Teodora Beloeil Hélène Allo Guillaume Pottecher Julien Lebas Benjamin Venot Clementine Rameau Jean Pierre Dimache Florin Léger Pierre Saint El Amine Younes

JAMA 20200101 3

<h4>Importance</h4>It is not known if use of colloid solutions containing hydroxyethyl starch (HES) to correct for intravascular deficits in high-risk surgical patients is either effective or safe.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the effect of HES 130/0.4 compared with 0.9% saline for intravascular volume expansion on mortality and postoperative complications after major abdominal surgery.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>Multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial ...[more]

PMID: 31961418

Similar Datasets

Project description:The use of artificial colloids is currently controversial, especially in Central Europe Several studies demonstrated a worse outcome in intensive care unit patients with the use of hydroxyethyl starch. This recently even led to a drug warning about use of hydroxyethyl starch products in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. The data on hydroxyethyl starch in non-critically ill patients are insufficient to support perioperative use.We are conducting a single-center, open-label, randomized, comparative trial with two parallel patient groups to compare human albumin 5% (test drug) with hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4 (comparator). The primary endpoint is cystatin C ratio, calculated as the ratio of the cystatin value at day 90 after surgery relative to the preoperative value. Secondary objectives are inter alia the evaluation of the influence of human albumin and hydroxyethyl starch on further laboratory chemical and clinical parameters, glycocalyx shedding, intensive care unit and hospital stay and acute kidney injury as defined by RIFLE criteria (risk of renal dysfunction, injury to the kidney, failure of kidney function, loss of kidney function, and end-stage kidney disease) criteria.There is a general lack of evidence on the relative safety and effects of hydroxyethyl starch compared with human albumin for volume replacement in a perioperative setting. Previously conducted studies of surgical patients in which researchers have compared different hydroxyethyl starch products included too few patients to properly evaluate clinical important outcomes such as renal function. In the present study in a high-risk patient population undergoing a major surgical intervention, we will determine if perioperative fluid replacement with human albumin 5% will have a long-term advantage over a third-generation hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 on the progression of renal dysfunction until 90 days after surgery.EudraCT number 2010-018343-34. Registered on 11 January 2010.

Project description:BackgroundThe safety of perioperative intravenous hydroxyethyl starch (HES) products, specifically HES 130/0.4, continues to be the source of much debate. The aim of this meta-analysis was to update the existing evidence and gain further insight into the clinical effects of HES 130/0.4 on postoperative outcomes for volume replacement therapy in surgical patients.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to March 2020 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on perioperative use of HES 130/0.4 in adult surgical patients. The primary outcome was postoperative mortality and secondary outcomes were the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) and requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT). The analysis was performed using the random-effects method and the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed the risk-of-bias assessment of eligible studies and assessed the overall quality of evidence for each outcome.ResultsTwenty-five RCTs with 4111 participants were finally included. There were no statistical differences between HES 130/0.4 and other fluids in mortality at 30 days (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.86, p = 0.20), the incidence of AKI (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.53, p = 0.07), or requirement for RRT (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.53, p = 0.43). Overall, there was a moderate certainty of evidence for all the outcomes. There was no subgroup difference related to the type of surgery (p = 0.17) in the incidence of AKI. As for the type of comparator fluids, however, there was a trend that was not statistically significant (p = 0.06) towards the increased incidence of AKI in the HES 130/0.4 group (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.54) compared with the crystalloid group (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.91). Subgroup analyses according to the type of surgery demonstrated consistent findings.ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that the use of HES 130/0.4 for volume replacement therapy compared with other fluids resulted in no significant difference in postoperative mortality or kidney dysfunction among surgical patients. Given the absent evidence of confirmed benefit and the potential trend of increased kidney injury, we cannot recommend the routine clinical use of HES 130/0.4 for volume replacement therapy in surgical patients from the perspective of benefit/risk profile. However, the results need to be interpreted with caution due to the limited sample size, and further well-powered RCTs are warranted.Trial registrationPROSPERO registry reference: CRD42020173058.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) have an impact on the recovery of adults after surgery. It is therefore important to establish whether preoperative respiratory rehabilitation can decrease the risk of PPCs and to identify adults who might benefit from respiratory rehabilitation.ObjectivesOur primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of preoperative inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on PPCs in adults undergoing cardiac or major abdominal surgery. We looked at all-cause mortality and adverse events.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2014), EMBASE (1980 to October 2014), CINAHL (1982 to October 2014), LILACS (1982 to October 2014), and ISI Web of Science (1985 to October 2014). We did not impose any language restrictions.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials that compared preoperative IMT and usual preoperative care for adults undergoing cardiac or major abdominal surgery.Data collection and analysisTwo or more review authors independently identified studies, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We extracted the following information: study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, and outcome measures. We contacted study authors for additional information in order to identify any unpublished data.Main resultsWe included 12 trials with 695 participants; five trials included participants awaiting elective cardiac surgery and seven trials included participants awaiting elective major abdominal surgery. All trials contained at least one domain judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias. Of greatest concern was the risk of bias associated with inadequate blinding, as it was impossible to blind participants due to the nature of the study designs. We could pool postoperative atelectasis in seven trials (443 participants) and postoperative pneumonia in 11 trials (675 participants) in a meta-analysis. Preoperative IMT was associated with a reduction of postoperative atelectasis and pneumonia, compared with usual care or non-exercise intervention (respectively; risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.82 and RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.77). We could pool all-cause mortality within postoperative period in seven trials (431 participants) in a meta-analysis. However, the effect of IMT on all-cause postoperative mortality is uncertain (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.23). Eight trials reported the incidence of adverse events caused by IMT. All of these trials reported that there were no adverse events in both groups. We could pool the mean duration of hospital stay in six trials (424 participants) in a meta-analysis. Preoperative IMT was associated with reduced length of hospital stay (MD -1.33, 95% CI -2.53 to -0.13). According to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group guidelines for evaluating the impact of healthcare interventions, the overall quality of studies for the incidence of pneumonia was moderate, whereas the overall quality of studies for the incidence of atelectasis, all-cause postoperative death, adverse events, and duration of hospital stay was low or very low.Authors' conclusionsWe found evidence that preoperative IMT was associated with a reduction of postoperative atelectasis, pneumonia, and duration of hospital stay in adults undergoing cardiac and major abdominal surgery. The potential for overestimation of treatment effect due to lack of adequate blinding, small-study effects, and publication bias needs to be considered when interpreting the present findings.

Project description:Perner A, Haase N, Guttormsen AB, Tenhunen J, Klemenzson G, Åneman A, Madsen KR, Møller MH, Elkjær JM, Poulsen LM, Bendtsen A, Winding R, Steensen M, Berezowicz P, Søe-Jensen P, Bestle M, Strand K, Wiis J, White JO, Thornberg KJ, Quist L, Nielsen J, Andersen LH, Holst LB, Thormar K, Kjældgaard AL, Fabritius ML, Mondrup F, Pott FC, Møller TP, Winkel P, Wetterslev J; 6S Trial Group; Scandinavian Critical Care Trials Group: Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer's acetate in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med 2012, 367:124-34.Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) is widely used for fluid resuscitation in ICUs, but its safety and efficacy have not been established in patients with severe sepsis.To assess the effects of HES 130/0.4 compared with a balanced crystalloid solution on mortality and end-stage kidney failure in patients with severe sepsis.Multicenter, parallel-group, blinded, randomized clinical trial, in patients with severe sepsis.Patients with severe sepsis admitted to the ICU received fluid resuscitation with either 6% HES 130/0.42 (Tetraspan) or Ringer’s acetate at a dose of up to 33 ml per kilogram of ideal body weight per day.Of the 804 patients who underwent randomization, 798 were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. The two intervention groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 90 days after randomization, 201 of 398 patients (51%) assigned to HES 130/0.42 had died, as compared with 172 of 400 patients (43%) assigned to Ringer's acetate (relative risk, 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01 to 1.36; P=0.03); 1 patient in each group had end-stage kidney failure. In the 90-day period, 87 patients (22%) assigned to HES 130/0.42 were treated with renal replacement therapy versus 65 patients (16%) assigned to Ringer's acetate (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.80; P=0.04), and 38 patients (10%) and 25 patients (6%), respectively, had severe bleeding (relative risk, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.94 to 2.48; P=0.09). The results were supported by multivariate analyses, with adjustment for known risk factors for death or acute kidney injury at baseline.Patients with severe sepsis assigned to fluid resuscitation with HES 130/0.42 had an increased risk of death at day 90 and were more likely to require renal replacement therapy compared with those receiving Ringer's acetate.

Project description:ImportanceIn patients who undergo mechanical ventilation during surgery, the ideal tidal volume is unclear.ObjectiveTo determine whether low-tidal-volume ventilation compared with conventional ventilation during major surgery decreases postoperative pulmonary complications.Design, setting, and participantsSingle-center, assessor-blinded, randomized clinical trial of 1236 patients older than 40 years undergoing major noncardiothoracic, nonintracranial surgery under general anesthesia lasting more than 2 hours in a tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia, from February 2015 to February 2019. The last date of follow-up was February 17, 2019.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive a tidal volume of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight (n = 614; low tidal volume group) or a tidal volume of 10 mL/kg predicted body weight (n = 592; conventional tidal volume group). All patients received positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) at 5 cm H2O.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days, including pneumonia, bronchospasm, atelectasis, pulmonary congestion, respiratory failure, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or unplanned requirement for postoperative invasive or noninvasive ventilation. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pulmonary complications including development of pulmonary embolism, acute respiratory distress syndrome, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, acute kidney injury, wound infection (superficial and deep), rate of intraoperative need for vasopressor, incidence of unplanned intensive care unit admission, rate of need for rapid response team call, intensive care unit length of stay, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality.ResultsAmong 1236 patients who were randomized, 1206 (98.9%) completed the trial (mean age, 63.5 years; 494 [40.9%] women; 681 [56.4%] undergoing abdominal surgery). The primary outcome occurred in 231 of 608 patients (38%) in the low tidal volume group compared with 232 of 590 patients (39%) in the conventional tidal volume group (difference, -1.3% [95% CI, -6.8% to 4.2%]; risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.84-1.11]; P = .64). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceAmong adult patients undergoing major surgery, intraoperative ventilation with low tidal volume compared with conventional tidal volume, with PEEP applied equally between groups, did not significantly reduce pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days.Trial registrationANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12614000790640.

Dataset Information

Effect of Hydroxyethyl Starch vs Saline for Volume Replacement Therapy on Death or Postoperative Complications Among High-Risk Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: The FLASH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Effect of Hydroxyethyl Starch vs Saline for Volume Replacement Therapy on Death or Postoperative Complications Among High-Risk Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: The FLASH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets