Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fluid administration is a key tool in the maintenance of normovolemia in patients with cardiac surgery. The trials that evaluated the safety of 6% hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 130/0.4 in cardiac surgical patients were inconsistent. It is necessary to compare the efficacy and safety of albumin and 6% HES (130/0.4). METHOD: We searched for the randomized controlled clinical trials that compared human albumin with 6% HES (130/0.4) in cardiac surgery in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. RESULTS: Ten studies involved a total of 1567 patients were included in our meta-analysis. For the efficiency, there was no difference in total volume of infusion between compared groups [P = 0.64, Fixed Effect Model (FEM): standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) (- 0.12, 0.20)]. As for safety, the albumin show more risk than hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 in blood loss [P = 0.02, FEM: SMD: 0.22, 95% CI (0.03, 0.41)]. There was no difference in the frequency of transfusions (P = 0.20, RR = 1.11; 95% CI (0.95, 1.27)) between the two groups. No difference was observed for the days in intensive care unit [P = 0.05, FEM: SMD = - 0.18, 95% CI (- 0.36, 0.00)], and the days in hospital [P = 0.32, FEM: SMD = - 0.11, 95% CI (- 0.32, 0.10)]. Furthermore, both the incidence of AKI, RRT, and mortality were comparable in the two groups. CONCLUSION: This study provided evidence that the 6% HES (130/0.4) might be the substitute for HA, which reduced the economic burden for patients with cardiac surgery. However, the effect of 6% HES (130/0.4) and HA on AKI still needs to be further studied.