Safety and efficacy of hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4/9 solution versus 5% human serum albumin in thoracic esophagectomy with 3-field lymph nodes dissection
We investigated the safety and efficacy of administering hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4/9 (HES130/0.4/9) versus 5% human serum albumin (HSA), perioperatively, to patients undergoing thoracic esophagectomy with 3-field lymph-node dissection for esophageal cancer.
The subjects of this study were 262 patients, scheduled to undergo thoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, who were assigned to one of two groups based on the fluid replacement therapy. We compared the intraoperative and immediate postoperative hemodynamics and incidence of complications in the two groups.
Neither group suffered any adverse events. No significant differences were observed in systolic/diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative urine output, or serum creatinine levels, between the groups. A mild postoperative increase (×1.5 increase) in serum creatinine levels was seen in 9.5% and 9.5% of patients in the HSA and HES130/0.4/9 groups, respectively (p = 0.99), and a moderate postoperative increase (×2.0 increase) was seen in 4.4% and 3.1%, respectively (p = 0.84). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that the administration of hydroxyethyl starch was not associated with a postoperative increase in serum creatinine levels.
Hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4/9 was well tolerated and comparable to albumin with respect to its effect on renal function during thoracic esophagectomy with 3-field lymph-node dissection.
KeywordsEsophageal cancers Esophagectomy Hydroxyethyl starch 6% 130/0.4/9
We thank the members of the Division of Esophageal Surgery for their critical discussion of our manuscript. We also thank the members of the Division of Gastrointestinal Oncology for reviewing and discussing the study.
All persons who meet authorship criteria are listed as authors, and all authors certify that they have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content, including participation in the concept, design, analysis, writing, or revision of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
There are no financial relationships or support that may pose a conflict of interest.
The content has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere.
- 12.Skhirtladze K, Base EM, Lassnigg A, Kaider A, Linke S, Dworschak M, et al. Comparison of the effects of albumin 5%, hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 6%, and Ringer’s lactate on blood loss and coagulation after cardiac surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2013;112:281–9.Google Scholar
- 14.Hosseinzadeh Maleki M, Derakhshan P, Rahmanian Sharifabad A, Amouzeshi A. Comparing the effects of 5% albumin and 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (Voluven) on renal function as priming solutions for cardiopulmonary bypass: A randomized double blind clinical trial. Anesth Pain Med. 2016;18:Epub.Google Scholar
- 19.Li Y, He R, Ying X, Hahn RG. Ringer’s lactate, but not hydroxyethyl starch,prolongs the food intolerance time after major abdominal surgery; an open-labelled clinical trial. BMC Anesthesiol 2015;72.Google Scholar