CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT00935168CHESTUpdated Nov 16, 2012

Crystalloid Versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trials

A Phase 3 interventional study of 6% Hydroxy-ethyl starch (130/0.4) and Saline in Intensive Care, sponsored by The George Institute. Completed at 1 site in Australia. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2012-11-16.

Sponsored by The George Institute · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
7,000
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of this study is to determine whether patients in the Intensive Care Unit who receive fluid resuscitation with either hydroxyethyl starch (a synthetic colloid solution) or saline (a salt solution), have an increased rate of survival at 90 days.

Read the detailed description

Patients in intensive care units frequently require intravenous fluid because the treating clinicians consider that the patient's blood pressure or circulating blood volume needs to be increased to clinically acceptable levels. Despite fluid resuscitation being a fundamental part of standard medical treatment for critically ill patients, clinicians are left with uncertainty about the optimal choice and volume of fluid that should be administered.

This study is a prospective, multi-centre, blinded, randomised controlled trial.

The two fluids being compared are 0.9% sodium chloride (saline) and 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 in 0.9% sodium chloride,(starch). The null hypothesis assumes no difference in all-cause mortality between patients given starch in comparison with patients given saline for fluid resuscitation.

Each patient who meets all inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria will be randomised to receive one of the two study fluids for fluid resuscitation.

Once treatment has been assigned the participant will continue to receive either starch or saline only for all fluid resuscitation requirements in intensive care. The treating clinical team will decide the amount and frequency of the fluid given for resuscitation based on standard care.

During their ICU stay, participants will have information on the use of study fluids, other fluids, kidney function, blood pressure, heart rate and other haemodynamic data that is routinely recorded in the medical record collected. All participants will be followed up at day 90 and at 6 months after randomisation.

The participants status (alive, in hospital and length of stay) will be recorded at day 28 and day 90 after randomisation. At the 6 month follow-up all participants or their carer will be interviewed by telephone using standardised questionnaires about the participant's quality of life. In addition, participants who were admitted to intensive care with a traumatic brain injury will be interviewed to determine how well the participant is recovering.

After all patients have completed the 6 months of follow-up, data linkage will also be used to link patients (in NSW only) to health databases in order to obtain information on their use of health services.

02

Conditions studied

  • Intensive Care

Keywords

  • Intensive Care
  • Fluid Resuscitation
  • Saline
  • Hydroxy-ethyl starch
03

In context

Lead sponsor

The George Institute is the lead sponsor of 53 studies on the registry; 12 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Written informed consent has been obtained or if not possible, the procedure for obtaining informed consent has been approved by the ethics committee.
  • Fluid resuscitation is required to increase or maintain intravascular volume that is in addition to maintenance fluids, enteral and parenteral nutrition, blood products and specific replacement fluids to replace ongoing insensible or fluid losses from other sites (e.g., fistula losses from the gastrointestinal tract, urinary losses from diabetes insipidus or the polyuric phase of acute renal failure or to correct metabolic derangements).
  • The ICU clinician considers that both 6% hydroxyethyl starch (130/0.4) and saline are equally appropriate for the patient and that no specific indication or contraindication for either exists.
  • The requirement for fluid resuscitation must be supported by AT LEAST ONE of the following clinical signs:

    1. Heart rate > 90 beats per minute
    2. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) \< 100mmHg or mean arterial pressure (MAP) \< 75mmHg or at least 40mmHg decrease in SBP or MAP from the baseline recording
    3. Central venous pressure \< 10mmHg
    4. Pulmonary artery wedge pressure \< 12 mmHg
    5. Respiratory variation in systolic or mean arterial blood pressure of >5 mmHg
    6. Capillary refill time > one second
    7. Urine output \< 0.5 ml/kg for one hour

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous allergic reaction to hydroxyethyl starch solution.
  • Primary non-traumatic intracranial haemorrhage or severe traumatic intracranial haemorrhage (mass lesion > 25 ml).
  • Patients who are receiving renal replacement therapy or in whom the ICU physician considers renal replacement therapy is imminent (i.e. renal replacement therapy will start in 6 hours)
  • Patients with documented serum creatinine value ≥ 350µmol/L and urine output averaging ≤ 10ml / hr over 12 hours
  • Severe hypernatraemia (Serum sodium > 160 mmol/l) or severe hyperchloraemia (Serum chloride > 130 mmol/l).
  • Women of child bearing age (18-49 years old), unless evidence of documented menopause, hysterectomy or surgical sterilisation or negative pregnancy test before randomisation
  • Breastfeeding
  • Patients who have received > 1000mL hydroxyethyl starch in the 24 hours before randomization.
  • Patients admitted to the ICU following cardiac surgery; patients admitted to ICU following cardiac surgery.
  • Patients admitted to the ICU for the treatment of burns or following liver transplantation surgery.
  • Death is deemed imminent and inevitable or the patient has an underlying disease process with a life expectancy of \< 90 days.
  • A limitation of therapy order has been documented restricting implementation of the study protocol or the treating clinician deems aggressive care unsuitable.
  • Patient has previously been enrolled in the CHEST study.
  • Patient has previously received fluid resuscitation that was prescribed within the study ICU during this current ICU admission.
  • Patient has been transferred to the study ICU from another ICU and received fluid resuscitation for the treatment of volume depletion in that other ICU.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
7,000 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Hydroxy-ethyl starch

    Intravenous fluid resuscitation with 6% Hydroxy-ethyl starch (130/0.4)

    Drug: 6% Hydroxy-ethyl starch (130/0.4)

  • Active comparator
    Saline

    Intravenous fluid resuscitation with saline (0.9% sodium chloride)

    Drug: Saline

Interventions

  • Drug6% Hydroxy-ethyl starch (130/0.4)

    Maximum dose of 50ml/kg/day of 6% hydroxy-ethyl starch (130/0.4) for intravascular volume fluid resuscitation

    Also known as: Voluven 6%

  • DrugSaline

    Maximum dose of 50ml/kg/day of saline for intravascular volume fluid resuscitation

    Also known as: Sodium Chloride 0.9%

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. All cause mortality

    Time frame: 90 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy will be assessed using hospital records.

    Time frame: During intensive care Unit (ICU) stay after randomisation up to 90 days

  2. Other organ failures will be assessed using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score which is based on biochemical and bio-physiological parameters recorded in the hospital record.

    Time frame: During ICU stay after randomisation up to 90 days

  3. ICU, hospital and 28 day mortality

    Time frame: At 28 days and 6 months after randomisation

  4. Quality of life will be assessed using the EQ-5D questionnaire.

    Time frame: 6 months after randomisation

  5. Functional status will be assessed using the Glasgow Outcome score.

    Time frame: 6 months after randomisation.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • The George Institute for International Health
    Sydney, New South Wales 2000, Australia
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Taylor C, Thompson K, Finfer S, Higgins A, Jan S, Li Q, Liu B, Myburgh J; Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial (CHEST) investigators and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group. Hydroxyethyl starch versus saline for resuscitation of patients in intensive care: long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis of a cohort from CHEST. Lancet Respir Med. 2016 Oct;4(10):818-825. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(16)30120-5. Epub 2016 Jun 17. PubMed 27324967 ↗
  • Phillips DP, Kaynar AM, Kellum JA, Gomez H. Crystalloids vs. colloids: KO at the twelfth round? Crit Care. 2013 May 29;17(3):319. doi: 10.1186/cc12708. PubMed 23731998 ↗
  • Myburgh JA, Finfer S, Bellomo R, Billot L, Cass A, Gattas D, Glass P, Lipman J, Liu B, McArthur C, McGuinness S, Rajbhandari D, Taylor CB, Webb SA; CHEST Investigators; Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group. Hydroxyethyl starch or saline for fluid resuscitation in intensive care. N Engl J Med. 2012 Nov 15;367(20):1901-11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1209759. Epub 2012 Oct 17. Erratum In: N Engl J Med. 2016 Mar 31;374(13):1298. doi: 10.1056/NEJMx160007. PubMed 23075127 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 16, 2012, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00935168
Lead sponsor
The George Institute
Collaborators
University of Sydney, Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group, Fresenius Kabi
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 8, 2009
Start date
Dec 2009
Primary completion
Apr 2012
Completion
Sep 2012
Last update
Nov 16, 2012

Study contacts

John A Myburgh, PhD FJFICM
study chair · The George Institute
Simon Finfer
principal investigator · Royal North Shore Hospital, NSW, Australia
David Gattas
principal investigator · Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, NSW, Australia
Eddie Stachowski
principal investigator · Westmead Hospital, NSW, Australia
Michael Parr
principal investigator · Liverpool Hospital, NSW, Australia
Ian Seppelt
principal investigator · Nepean Hospital, NSW, Australia
Peter Harrigan
principal investigator · John Hunter Hospital, NSW, Australia
Rinaldo Bellomo
principal investigator · Austin Hospital, VIC, Australia
Forbes McGain
principal investigator · Western Hospital, VIC, Australia
Rob Boots
principal investigator · Royal Brisbane & Women's Hospital, QLD, Australia
Jason Fletcher
principal investigator · Bendigo Health, VIC, Australia
David Milliss
principal investigator · Concord Hospital, NSW, Australia
Benno Ihle
principal investigator · Epworth Richmond, VIC, Australia
David Ernest
principal investigator · Box Hill Hospital, VIC, Australia
Jeffrey Presneill
principal investigator · Mater Health Services, QLD, Australia
Claire Cattigan
principal investigator · Geelong Hospital, VIC, Australia
Katrina Ellem
principal investigator · Calvary Mater Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Seton Henderson
principal investigator · Christchurch Hospital, New Zealand
Shay McGuinness
principal investigator · Auckland CVICU, New Zealand
Dick Dinsdale
principal investigator · Wellington Hospital, New Zealand
Michael Reade
principal investigator · The Northen Hospital, VIC, Australia
Bart de Keulenaer
principal investigator · Fremantle Hospital, WA, Australia
Latesh Poojara
principal investigator · Blacktown Hospital, NSW, Australia
Yahya Shehabi
principal investigator · Prince of Wales Hospital, NSW, Australia
Imogen Mitchell
principal investigator · The Canberra Hospital, ACT, Australia
John Santamaria
principal investigator · St Vincent's Hospital, VIC, Australia
Troy Browne
principal investigator · Tauranga Hospital, New Zealand
Kavi Haji
principal investigator · Frankston Hospital, VIC Australia
Frank van Haren
principal investigator · Waikato Hospital, New Zealand
Janet Liang
principal investigator · North Shore Hospital, New Zealand
Bala Venkatesh
principal investigator · Wesley Hospital, VIC, Australia
David Cooper
principal investigator · Royal Hobart Hospital, TAS, Australia
John Myburgh
principal investigator · St George Hospital, NSW, Australia

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2012. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion