Currently, there are no consensus recommendations regarding the use of HES in veterinary medicine. Veterinarians and institutions affected by the HES restrictions have had to critically reassess the risks and benefits related to HES usage based on the available information and sometimes adapt their procedures and policies based on their reassessment. Meanwhile, large, prospective, randomized veterinary studies evaluating HES use are needed to achieve relevant levels of evidence to enable formulation of specific veterinary guidelines.

HES administration in this canine population did not result in increased creatinine concentrations compared to administration of CRYSs. Further studies are needed to establish the safety of HES in critically ill dogs.

The use of synthetic colloids (SCs), particularly hydroxyethyl starch (HES), in people has changed in recent years following new evidence raising concerns about their efficacy and safety. Although fluid therapy guidelines for small animals are often extrapolated from human medicine, little information exists on current practice in veterinary medicine. The objective of the present study was to investigate current fluid selection, use of plasma volume expanders including SCs, and recent changes in their use in small animal practice. An Internet-based survey was conducted, inviting veterinarians to report their practices in fluid resuscitation and colloid osmotic pressure support, their choice of SC, and perceived adverse effects and contraindications associated with SC use. There were 1,134 respondents from 42 countries, including 46% general practitioners and 38% diplomates. Isotonic crystalloids, HES, and hypertonic saline were chosen by most respondents for fluid resuscitation, and HES by 75% of respondents for colloid osmotic support. Dextran and gelatin were used by some European respondents. Human serum albumin was used more than canine albumin but 45% of respondents, particularly those from Australia and New Zealand, used no albumin product. The majority (70%) of respondents changed their practice regarding SCs in recent years (mostly by limiting their use), largely due to safety concerns. However, only 27% of respondents worked in an institution that had a general policy on SC use. Impaired renal function, coagulopathy, and hypertension were most often considered contraindications; impaired coagulation tests and increased respiratory rate were the most frequently perceived adverse effects. The use of HES remains widespread practice in small animals, regardless of geographic location. Nevertheless, awareness of safety issues and restrictions on the use of SCs imposed in human medicine seems to have prompted a decrease in use of SCs by veterinarians. Given the paucity of evidence regarding efficacy and safety, and differences in cohorts between human and veterinary critical care patients, studies are needed to establish evidence-based guidelines specific for dogs and cats.

BackgroundHyperosmolar therapy with either mannitol or hypertonic saline (HTS) is commonly used in the treatment of intracranial hypertension (ICH). In vitro data indicate that both mannitol and HTS affect coagulation and platelet function in dogs. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 20% mannitol and 7.2% HTS on whole blood coagulation using rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) and platelet function using a platelet function analyzer (PFA®) in dogs with suspected ICH. Thirty client-owned dogs with suspected ICH needing osmotherapy were randomized to receive either 20% mannitol (5 ml/kg IV over 15 min) or 7.2% HTS (4 ml/kg IV over 5 min). ROTEM® (EXTEM® and FIBTEM® assays) and PFA® analyses (collagen/ADP cartridges) were performed before (T0), as well as 5 (T5), 60 (T60) and 120 (T120) minutes after administration of HTS or mannitol. Data at T5, T60 and T120 were analyzed as a percentage of values at T0 for comparison between groups, and as absolute values for comparison between time points, respectively.ResultsNo significant difference was found between the groups for the percentage change of any parameter at any time point except for FIBTEM® clotting time. Within each group, no significant difference was found between time points for any parameter except for FIBTEM® clotting time in the HTS group, and EXTEM® and FIBTEM® maximum clot firmness in the mannitol group. Median ROTEM® values lay within institutional reference intervals in both groups at all time points, whereas median PFA® values were above the reference intervals at T5 (both groups) and T60 (HTS group).ConclusionsUsing currently recommended doses, mannitol and HTS do not differ in their effects on whole blood coagulation and platelet function in dogs with suspected ICH. Moreover, no relevant impairment of whole blood coagulation was found following treatment with either solution, whereas a short-lived impairment of platelet function was found after both solutions.

Colloid solutions, both natural and synthetic, had been widely accepted as having superior volume expanding effects than crystalloids. Synthetic colloid solutions were previously considered at least as effective as natural colloids, as well as being cheaper and easily available. As a result, synthetic colloids (and HES in particular) were the preferred resuscitation fluid in many countries. In the past decade, several cascading events have called into question their efficacy and revealed their harmful effects. In 2013, the medicines authorities placed substantial restrictions on HES administration in people which has resulted in an overall decrease in their use. Whether natural colloids (such as albumin-containing solutions) should replace synthetic colloids remains inconclusive based on the current evidence. Albumin seems to be safer than synthetic colloids in people, but clear evidence of a positive effect on survival is still lacking. Furthermore, species-specific albumin is not widely available, while xenotransfusions with human serum albumin have known side effects. Veterinary data on the safety and efficacy of synthetic and natural colloids is limited to mostly retrospective evaluations or experimental studies with small numbers of patients (mainly dogs). Large, prospective, randomized, long-term outcome-oriented studies are lacking. This review focuses on advantages and disadvantages of synthetic and natural colloids in veterinary medicine. Adopting human guidelines is weighed against the particularities of our specific patient populations, including the risk–benefit ratio and lack of alternatives available in human medicine.