Hydroxyethyl starch versus saline for resuscitation of patients in intensive care: long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis of a cohort from CHEST.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Corporate Authors:
      Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial (CHEST) investigators and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group
    • Source:
      Publisher: Elsevier Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101605555 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2213-2619 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 22132600 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Lancet Respir Med Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: Kidlington, Oxford Elsevier, [2013]-
    • Subject Terms:
      Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives/*economics ; Isotonic Solutions/*economics ; Plasma Substitutes/*economics ; Resuscitation/*methods ; Sodium Chloride/*economics; Aged ; Cohort Studies ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Critical Care/economics ; Critical Care/methods ; Crystalloid Solutions ; Female ; Humans ; Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives/therapeutic use ; Isotonic Solutions/therapeutic use ; Male ; Middle Aged ; New South Wales ; Patient Outcome Assessment ; Plasma Substitutes/therapeutic use ; Resuscitation/economics ; Sodium Chloride/therapeutic use
    • Abstract:
      Background: Hydroxyethyl starch for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients is not associated with improved short-term patient-centred outcomes compared with crystalloid fluid solutions. However, its effect on longer term health economic outcomes has not been reported.
      Methods: We did a prespecified cost-effectiveness analysis of a cohort of patients from New South Wales enrolled in the Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial (CHEST), who were randomised to treatment with either 6% hydroxyethyl starch with a molecular weight of 130 kD and a molar substitution ratio of 0·4 or 0·9% sodium chloride (saline) for fluid resuscitation. Clinical outcomes were mortality and life-years gained at 6 months and 24 months, health-related quality of life at 6 months, and quality-adjusted life-years gained at 6 months. Health economic outcomes were hospital and intensive-care unit (ICU) resource use and costs at 24 months and cost-effectiveness, which we defined as the probability of reaching a willingness-to-pay threshold of less than A$50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 6 months and $100 000 per life-year gained at 24 months. CHEST is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00935168.
      Findings: 3537 (51%) of 7000 patients were enrolled into CHEST from New South Wales, of whom 3450 (98%) were included in our cost-effectiveness analysis. Mortality at both 6 months and 24 months did not differ between the hydroxyethyl starch and saline groups (6 months: 397/1684 [24%] vs 382/1706 [22%]; relative risk [RR] 1·05, 95% CI 0·93-1·19; p=0·41; 24 months: 586/1687 [35%] vs 594/1708 [35%]; RR 1·00, 95% CI 0·91-1·10; p=0·89). The mean number of life-years gained at 6 months and 24 months was similar between the hydroxyethyl starch and saline groups (6 months: 0·41 days [SD 0·18] vs 0·41 days [0·17]; p=0·25; 24 months: 1·46 years [SD 0·80] vs 1·47 years [0·79]; p=0·72). At 6 months, the mean health-related quality of life score was 0·67 (SD 0·34) with hydroxyethyl starch versus 0·69 (0·35) with saline (p=0·33). The mean number of quality-adjusted life-years gained did not differ between the hydroxyethyl starch and saline groups at 6 months (0·26 days [SD 0·18] vs 0·26 days [0·18]; p=0·33). Total hospital costs (including ICU costs) at 24 months were similar between the hydroxyethyl starch and saline groups (A$62 196 [55 935] vs $62 617 [56 452]; p=0·83). The probability that hydroxyethyl starch was cost effective was 11% at 6 months and 29% at 24 months.
      Interpretation: Although longer term clinical outcomes did not differ between patients resuscitated with hydroxyethyl starch or saline in the ICU, from a health-care payer's perspective, the probability that hydroxyethyl starch is cost effective in these patients is low.
      Funding: Division of Critical Care and Trauma, George Institute for Global Health.
      (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
    • Comments:
      Comment in: Lancet Respir Med. 2016 Oct;4(10 ):769-770. (PMID: 27324966)
      Comment in: Chest. 2016 Dec;150(6):1179-1180. (PMID: 27938740)
    • Molecular Sequence:
      ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00935168
    • Accession Number:
      0 (Crystalloid Solutions)
      0 (Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives)
      0 (Isotonic Solutions)
      0 (Plasma Substitutes)
      451W47IQ8X (Sodium Chloride)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20160622 Date Completed: 20171207 Latest Revision: 20181202
    • Publication Date:
      20231215
    • Accession Number:
      10.1016/S2213-2600(16)30120-5
    • Accession Number:
      27324967