The Experts below are selected from a list of 270 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Hong Zhou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of synthetic colloids on oxidative stress and inflammatory response in hemorrhagic shock: comparison of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, and succinylated gelatin
Critical care (London England), 2013Co-Authors: Gan Chen, Guoxing You, Ying Wang, Wei-na Cheng, Jing Yang, Lian Zhao, Hong ZhouAbstract:This study compared the effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, and succinylated gelatin on oxidative stress and the inflammatory response in a rodent hemorrhagic shock model. Sodium pentobarbital-anesthetized adult male Wistar rats (200 g to 220 g) were subjected to a severe volume-controlled hemorrhage using arterial blood withdrawal (30 mL/kg to 33 mL/kg) and resuscitated with a colloid solution at the same volume as blood withdrawal (Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, or succinylated gelatin). Arterial blood gas parameters were monitored. Malondialdehyde (MDA) content and myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity in the liver, lungs, intestine, and brain were measured two hours after resuscitation. The levels of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 in the intestine were also measured. Infusions of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, but not Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 or succinylated gelatin, significantly reduced MDA levels and MPO activity in the liver, intestine, lungs and brain, and it also inhibited the production of TNF-α in the intestine two hours after resuscitation. However, no significant difference between Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 and succinylated gelatin was observed. Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, but not Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 or succinylated gelatin, treatment after hemorrhagic shock ameliorated oxidative stress and the inflammatory response in this rat model. No significant differences were observed after Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 or succinylated gelatin administration at doses of approximately 33 mL/kg.
-
effects of synthetic colloids on oxidative stress and inflammatory response in hemorrhagic shock comparison of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130 0 4 Hydroxyethyl Starch 200 0 5 and succinylated gelatin
Critical Care, 2013Co-Authors: Gan Chen, Guoxing You, Ying Wang, Wei-na Cheng, Jing Yang, Lian Zhao, Hong ZhouAbstract:Introduction This study compared the effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, and succinylated gelatin on oxidative stress and the inflammatory response in a rodent hemorrhagic shock model.
Christian J Wiedermann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Reporting bias in trials of volume resuscitation with Hydroxyethyl Starch
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2014Co-Authors: Christian J WiedermannAbstract:The possibility of renal damage by Hydroxyethyl Starch has become the focus of intensive dispute based on the findings of published large trials. The aim of this narrative review is to analyze outcome reporting bias in the literature on volume resuscitation, focusing on selective outcome reporting in published randomized and observational trials with “modern” Hydroxyethyl Starch as therapeutic intervention. Three recent publications claimed to confirm renal safety of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 for indications in severe sepsis, trauma, and critical illness, respectively. Selective outcome reporting was identified in these studies including underreporting of side effects and change of primary study outcomes. In conclusion, selective outcome reporting bias is identified in recent publications of clinical trials on volume resuscitation with HES. Die Gefahr der Nierenschädigung durch Hydroxyethylstärke (HES) hat sich zu einem Hauptthema der Diskussion von Ergebnissen rezenter klinischer Studien entwickelt. Ziel dieses Kommentars ist es, Vorhandensein und Art von Publikationsbias in der klinischen Forschung mit Hydroxyethylstärke zu analysieren, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der selektiven Berichterstattung von Ergebnissen in randomisierten kontrollierten Untersuchungen und Beobachtungsstudien mit „moderner“ Hydroxyethylstärke liegt. Drei aktuelle Publikationen postulierten renale Sicherheit von Hydroxyethylstärke 130/0,4 in den Indikationen schwere Sepsis, Trauma und intensivstationspflichtige Krankheit. Selektive Ergebnisberichterstattung wurde in allen drei Studien identifiziert einschließlich der Unterschlagung von Nebenwirkungen und der Abänderung von vordefinierten primären Studienendpunkten. Publikationsbias in Form selektiver Berichterstattung in mehreren jüngsten Veröffentlichungen klinischer Prüfungen zur Volumentherapie mit HES erschwert die Arbeit von Arzneimittelbehörden, pharmazeutischem und ärztlichem Personal.
-
Reporting bias in trials of volume resuscitation with Hydroxyethyl Starch.
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2014Co-Authors: Christian J WiedermannAbstract:The possibility of renal damage by Hydroxyethyl Starch has become the focus of intensive dispute based on the findings of published large trials. The aim of this narrative review is to analyze outcome reporting bias in the literature on volume resuscitation, focusing on selective outcome reporting in published randomized and observational trials with "modern" Hydroxyethyl Starch as therapeutic intervention. Three recent publications claimed to confirm renal safety of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 for indications in severe sepsis, trauma, and critical illness, respectively. Selective outcome reporting was identified in these studies including underreporting of side effects and change of primary study outcomes. In conclusion, selective outcome reporting bias is identified in recent publications of clinical trials on volume resuscitation with HES.
-
Accumulation of Hydroxyethyl Starch in human and animal tissues: a systematic review.
Intensive care medicine, 2013Co-Authors: Christian J Wiedermann, Michael JoannidisAbstract:Purpose To systematically review clinical and preclinical data on Hydroxyethyl Starch (HES) tissue storage.
-
Systematic review of randomized clinical trials on the use of Hydroxyethyl Starch for fluid management in sepsis
BMC Emergency Medicine, 2008Co-Authors: Christian J WiedermannAbstract:Background Patients with sepsis typically require large resuscitation volumes, but the optimal type of fluid remains unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current evidence on the effectiveness and safety of Hydroxyethyl Starch for fluid management in sepsis. Methods Computer searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were performed using search terms that included Hydroxyethyl Starch; hetaStarch; shock, septic; sepsis; randomized controlled trials; and random allocation. Additional methods were examination of reference lists and hand searching. Randomized clinical trials comparing Hydroxyethyl Starch with other fluids in patients with sepsis were selected. Data were extracted on numbers of patients randomized, specific indication, fluid regimen, follow-up, endpoints, Hydroxyethyl Starch volume infused and duration of administration, and major study findings. Results Twelve randomized trials involving a total of 1062 patients were included. Ten trials (83%) were acute studies with observation periods of 5 days or less, most frequently assessing cardiorespiratory and hemodynamic variables. Two trials were designed as outcome studies with follow-up for 34 and 90 days, respectively. Hydroxyethyl Starch increased the incidence of acute renal failure compared both with gelatin (odds ratio, 2.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.13–5.83) and crystalloid (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.22–2.71). In the largest and most recent trial a trend was observed toward increased overall mortality among Hydroxyethyl Starch recipients (odds ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.94–1.95), and mortality was higher (p < 0.001) in patients receiving > 22 mL·kg^-1 Hydroxyethyl Starch per day than lower doses. Conclusion Hydroxyethyl Starch increases the risk of acute renal failure among patients with sepsis and may also reduce the probability of survival. While the evidence reviewed cannot necessarily be applied to other clinical indications, Hydroxyethyl Starch should be avoided in sepsis.
-
Systematic review of randomized clinical trials on the use of Hydroxyethyl Starch for fluid management in sepsis
BMC emergency medicine, 2008Co-Authors: Christian J WiedermannAbstract:Patients with sepsis typically require large resuscitation volumes, but the optimal type of fluid remains unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current evidence on the effectiveness and safety of Hydroxyethyl Starch for fluid management in sepsis. Computer searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were performed using search terms that included Hydroxyethyl Starch; hetaStarch; shock, septic; sepsis; randomized controlled trials; and random allocation. Additional methods were examination of reference lists and hand searching. Randomized clinical trials comparing Hydroxyethyl Starch with other fluids in patients with sepsis were selected. Data were extracted on numbers of patients randomized, specific indication, fluid regimen, follow-up, endpoints, Hydroxyethyl Starch volume infused and duration of administration, and major study findings. Twelve randomized trials involving a total of 1062 patients were included. Ten trials (83%) were acute studies with observation periods of 5 days or less, most frequently assessing cardiorespiratory and hemodynamic variables. Two trials were designed as outcome studies with follow-up for 34 and 90 days, respectively. Hydroxyethyl Starch increased the incidence of acute renal failure compared both with gelatin (odds ratio, 2.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-5.83) and crystalloid (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-2.71). In the largest and most recent trial a trend was observed toward increased overall mortality among Hydroxyethyl Starch recipients (odds ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.95), and mortality was higher (p < 0.001) in patients receiving > 22 mL.kg-1 Hydroxyethyl Starch per day than lower doses. Hydroxyethyl Starch increases the risk of acute renal failure among patients with sepsis and may also reduce the probability of survival. While the evidence reviewed cannot necessarily be applied to other clinical indications, Hydroxyethyl Starch should be avoided in sepsis.
Donat R. Spahn - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
compromised blood coagulation an in vitro comparison of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130 0 4 and Hydroxyethyl Starch 200 0 5 using thrombelastography
Anesthesia & Analgesia, 1998Co-Authors: Marina Jamnicki, Andreas Zollinger, Burkhardt Seifert, Dragoljub Popovic, T. Pasch, Donat R. SpahnAbstract:We compared the effects of progressive in vitro hemodilution (30% and 60%) on blood coagulation in 80 patients receiving one of two different 6% Hydroxyethyl Starch (HES) solutions using thrombelastography (TEG).The newly developed solution has a mean molecular weight of 130 kD and a degree of subst
-
The effect of potato Starch derived and corn Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch on in vitro blood coagulation
Anaesthesia, 1998Co-Authors: Marina Jamnicki, Andreas Zollinger, Burkhardt Seifert, Dragoljub Popovic, T. Pasch, Donat R. SpahnAbstract:We have compared the effects of progressive in vitro haemodilution (30% and 60%) with potato Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch and corn Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch on blood coagulation in 80 patients using thrombelastography. Both solutions significantly compromised blood coagulation as evidenced by an increase in coagulation time and decrease in angle alpha, maximum amplitude and coagulation index (p < 0.05). Blood coagulation was more compromised during haemodilution with potato Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch as compared with corn Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch (p < 0.05). When taking the effect of haemodilution with 0.9% saline into account, haemodilution with both Hydroxyethyl Starch solutions also augmented clot lysis (p < 0.05), with potato Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch having a greater effect than corn Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch (p < 0.05). We conclude that potato Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch compromises in vitro blood coagulation more than corn Starch derived Hydroxyethyl Starch.
Gan Chen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of synthetic colloids on oxidative stress and inflammatory response in hemorrhagic shock: comparison of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, and succinylated gelatin
Critical care (London England), 2013Co-Authors: Gan Chen, Guoxing You, Ying Wang, Wei-na Cheng, Jing Yang, Lian Zhao, Hong ZhouAbstract:This study compared the effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, and succinylated gelatin on oxidative stress and the inflammatory response in a rodent hemorrhagic shock model. Sodium pentobarbital-anesthetized adult male Wistar rats (200 g to 220 g) were subjected to a severe volume-controlled hemorrhage using arterial blood withdrawal (30 mL/kg to 33 mL/kg) and resuscitated with a colloid solution at the same volume as blood withdrawal (Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, or succinylated gelatin). Arterial blood gas parameters were monitored. Malondialdehyde (MDA) content and myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity in the liver, lungs, intestine, and brain were measured two hours after resuscitation. The levels of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 in the intestine were also measured. Infusions of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, but not Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 or succinylated gelatin, significantly reduced MDA levels and MPO activity in the liver, intestine, lungs and brain, and it also inhibited the production of TNF-α in the intestine two hours after resuscitation. However, no significant difference between Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 and succinylated gelatin was observed. Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, but not Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 or succinylated gelatin, treatment after hemorrhagic shock ameliorated oxidative stress and the inflammatory response in this rat model. No significant differences were observed after Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5 or succinylated gelatin administration at doses of approximately 33 mL/kg.
-
effects of synthetic colloids on oxidative stress and inflammatory response in hemorrhagic shock comparison of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130 0 4 Hydroxyethyl Starch 200 0 5 and succinylated gelatin
Critical Care, 2013Co-Authors: Gan Chen, Guoxing You, Ying Wang, Wei-na Cheng, Jing Yang, Lian Zhao, Hong ZhouAbstract:Introduction This study compared the effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4, Hydroxyethyl Starch 200/0.5, and succinylated gelatin on oxidative stress and the inflammatory response in a rodent hemorrhagic shock model.
Anders Perner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Hydroxyethyl Starch for resuscitation.
Current opinion in critical care, 2013Co-Authors: Nicolai Haase, Anders PernerAbstract:Purpose of reviewResuscitation with Hydroxyethyl Starch (HES) is controversial. In this review, we will present the current evidence for the use of HES solutions including data from recent high-quality randomized clinical trials.Recent findingsMeta-analyses of HES vs. control fluids show clear signa
-
Is Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 safe?
Critical care (London England), 2012Co-Authors: Nicolai Haase, Anders PernerAbstract:It is heavily debated whether or not treatment with Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 contributes to the development of acute kidney failure in patients with severe sepsis. In the previous issue of Critical Care, Muller and colleagues report no association between initial resuscitation with Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 and renal impairment in a cohort of septic patients. Can we then consider Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 a safe intervention? The answer is no - observational data should be interpreted with caution and should mainly be used to identify risks, while safety must be assessed in randomised clinical trials. With these factors in mind, Muller's data associate the use of vasopressors with poor outcome, underlining the need for further randomised clinical trials to assess the potential harmful effects of common interventions in the critically ill.
