-
Perioperative Medicine (London, England) 2020Perioperative goal-directed haemodynamic therapy (GDHT), defined as the administration of fluids with or without inotropes or vasoactive agents against explicit measured...
BACKGROUND
Perioperative goal-directed haemodynamic therapy (GDHT), defined as the administration of fluids with or without inotropes or vasoactive agents against explicit measured goals to augment blood flow, has been evaluated in many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) over the past four decades. Reported post-operative pulmonary complications commonly include chest infection or pneumonia, atelectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury, aspiration pneumonitis, pulmonary embolism, and pulmonary oedema. Despite the substantial clinical literature in this area, it remains unclear whether their incidence is reduced by GDHT. This systematic review aims to determine the effect of GDHT on the respiratory outcomes listed above, in surgical patients.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and clinical trial registries up until January 2020. We included all RCTs reporting pulmonary outcomes. The primary outcome was post-operative pulmonary complications and secondary outcomes were specific pulmonary complications and intra-operative fluid input. Data synthesis was performed on Review Manager and heterogeneity was assessed using statistics.
RESULTS
We identified 66 studies with 9548 participants reporting pulmonary complications. GDHT resulted in a significant reduction in total pulmonary complications (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.92). The incidence of pulmonary infections, reported in 45 studies with 6969 participants, was significantly lower in the GDHT group (OR 0.72, CI 0.60 to 0.86). Pulmonary oedema was recorded in 23 studies with 3205 participants and was less common in the GDHT group (OR 0.47, CI 0.30 to 0.73). There were no differences in the incidences of pulmonary embolism or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Sub-group analyses demonstrated: (i) benefit from GDHT in general/abdominal/mixed and cardiothoracic surgery but not in orthopaedic or vascular surgery; and (ii) benefit from fluids with inotropes and/or vasopressors in combination but not from fluids alone. Overall, the GDHT group received more colloid (+280 ml) and less crystalloid (-375 ml) solutions than the control group. Due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity, we downgraded this evidence to moderate.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that the use of GDHT using fluids with inotropes and/or vasopressors, but not fluids alone, reduces the development of post-operative pulmonary infections and pulmonary oedema in general, abdominal and cardiothoracic surgical patients. This evidence was graded as moderate.PROSPERO registry reference: CRD42020170361.
PubMed: 33072306
DOI: 10.1186/s13741-020-00161-5 -
Abdominal Radiology (New York) Mar 2021This scoping review evaluated the currently available data related to abdominal imaging in the SARS-CoV-2 infection.
PURPOSE
This scoping review evaluated the currently available data related to abdominal imaging in the SARS-CoV-2 infection.
METHOD
A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science was performed from inception to July 15, 2020 using PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The review included case reports and series discussing radiologic manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection in abdominal imaging studies. Studies published from inception to March 31, 2020, were independently screened and reviewed by one author, and another author reviewed studies published after March 31 to July 15, 2020. Study screening and full-text review for publications before March 31, 2020, was performed by one author, and another author for publications after March 31 to July 15, 2020.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies were included in qualitative synthesis. The prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms is roughly 18% and includes loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. Sixteen percent of COVID-19 cases may only present with gastrointestinal symptoms. Many patients presenting this way demonstrate evidence of COVID-19 incidentally through abdominal CT imaging at the lung bases. Studies published to date have also reported abdominal imaging findings including small and large bowel wall thickening, fluid-filled colon, pneumatosis intestinalis, pneumoperitoneum, intussusception, and ascites.
CONCLUSION
Gastrointestinal manifestations and imaging manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection are increasingly reported and warrant specific attention during abdominal imaging.
Topics: Abdomen; COVID-19; Diagnostic Imaging; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 32926211
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02739-5 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Jan 2021Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most severe complication following colorectal resection and is associated with increased mortality. The main group of enzymes responsible... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most severe complication following colorectal resection and is associated with increased mortality. The main group of enzymes responsible for collagen and protein degradation in the extracellular matrix is matrix metalloproteinases. The literature is conflicting regarding anastomotic leakage and the degradation of extracellular collagen by matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9). In this systematic review, the possible correlation between anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery and MMP-9 activity is investigated.
METHODS
Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched up to 3 February 2020. All published articles that reported on the relationship between MMP-9 and anastomotic leakage were selected. Both human and animal studies were found eligible. The correlation between MMP-9 expression and anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery.
RESULTS
Seven human studies and five animal studies were included for analysis. The human studies were subdivided into those assessing MMP-9 in peritoneal drain fluid, intestinal biopsies, and blood samples. Five out of seven human studies reported elevated levels of MMP-9 in patients with anastomotic leakage on different postoperative moments. The animal studies demonstrated that MMP-9 activity was highest in the direct vicinity of an anastomosis. Moreover, MMP-9 activity was significantly reduced in areas further proximally and distally from the anastomosis and was nearly or completely absent in uninjured tissue.
CONCLUSION
Current literature shows some relation between MMP-9 activity and colorectal AL, but the evidence is inconsistent. Innovative techniques should further investigate the value of MMP-9 as a clinical biomarker for early detection, prevention, or treatment of AL.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Anastomotic Leak; Animals; Colorectal Surgery; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Humans; Matrix Metalloproteinase 9
PubMed: 32865714
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-020-03724-6 -
Critical Care Research and Practice 2020Intravenous fluid therapy plays a role in maintaining the hemodynamic status for tissue perfusion and electrolyte hemostasis during surgery. Recent trials in critically... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Intravenous fluid therapy plays a role in maintaining the hemodynamic status for tissue perfusion and electrolyte hemostasis during surgery. Recent trials in critically ill patients reported serious side effects of some types of fluids. Since the most suitable type of fluid is debatable, a consensus in perioperative patients has not been reached.
METHOD
We performed a systematic review of randomized control trials (RCTs) that compared two or more types of fluids in major abdominal surgery. The outcomes were related to bleeding, hemodynamic status, length of hospital stay, and complications, such as kidney injury, electrolyte abnormality, major cardiac adverse event, nausea, vomiting, and mortality. A literature search was performed using Medline and EMBASE up to December 2019. The data were pooled to investigate the effect of fluid on macrocirculation and intravascular volume effect.
RESULTS
Forty-three RCTs were included. Eighteen fluids were compared: nine were crystalloids and nine were colloids. The results were categorized into macrocirculation and intravascular volume effect, microcirculation, anti-inflammatory parameters, vascular permeability, renal function (colloids), renal function and electrolytes (crystalloids), coagulation and bleeding, return of bowel function, and postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV). We found that no specific type of fluid led to mortality and every type of colloid was equivalent in volume expansion and did not cause kidney injury. However, hydroxyethyl starch and dextran may lead to increased bleeding. Normal saline can cause kidney injury which can lead to renal replacement therapy, and dextrose fluid can decrease PONV.
CONCLUSION
In our opinion, it is safe to give a balanced crystalloid as the maintenance fluid and give a colloid, such as HES130/0.4, 4% gelatin, or human albumin, as a volume expander.
PubMed: 32832150
DOI: 10.1155/2020/2170828 -
ANZ Journal of Surgery Oct 2020The aim of this study was to identify the current evidence regarding the risk of acquiring viral infections from gases or plumes during intra-abdominal surgery....
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to identify the current evidence regarding the risk of acquiring viral infections from gases or plumes during intra-abdominal surgery. Peritoneal fluids may contain cellular material and virus particles. Electrocautery smoke and plumes from energy devices may aerosolize harmful substances and viral particles. Insufflation and desufflation during laparoscopic surgery may also aerosolize and distribute biological material. A systematic scoping review was performed to assess the evidence and inform safe surgical practice.
METHODS
A systematic search of the PubMed and Medline databases was undertaken until June 2020, observing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses methodology, to identify articles associating viral infection of operating room staff from surgical gases and plumes. All evidence levels were included. The search strategy utilized the search terms 'surgery', 'laparoscopy', 'laparoscopic' 'virus', 'smoke', 'risk', 'infection'.
RESULTS
The literature search identified 74 articles. Eight articles relevant to the subject of this review were included in the analysis, two of which specifically related to intra-abdominal surgery. Of the remaining six, four involved gynaecological surgery and two were in-vitro studies. No evidence that intra-abdominal surgery was associated with an increased risk of acquiring viral infections from exsufflated gas or smoke plumes was identified.
CONCLUSION
There is currently no evidence that respiratory viruses can be found in the peritoneal fluid. Whilst there is currently no evidence that desufflated carbon dioxide or surgical smoke plumes present a significant infectious risk, there is not a wealth of literature to inform current practice. Further clinical research in this area is required.
Topics: Female; Gases; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Insufflation; Laparoscopy; Virus Diseases
PubMed: 32808418
DOI: 10.1111/ans.16242 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2020Postpartum constipation, with symptoms, such as pain or discomfort, straining, and hard stool, is a common condition affecting mothers. Haemorrhoids, pain at the...
BACKGROUND
Postpartum constipation, with symptoms, such as pain or discomfort, straining, and hard stool, is a common condition affecting mothers. Haemorrhoids, pain at the episiotomy site, effects of pregnancy hormones, and haematinics used in pregnancy can increase the risk of postpartum constipation. Eating a high-fibre diet and increasing fluid intake are usually encouraged. Although laxatives are commonly used in relieving constipation, the effectiveness and safety of available interventions for preventing postpartum constipation should be ascertained. This is an update of a review first published in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of interventions for preventing postpartum constipation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, and two trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (7 October 2019), and screened reference lists of retrieved trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any intervention for preventing postpartum constipation versus another intervention, placebo, or no intervention in postpartum women. Interventions could include pharmacological (e.g. laxatives) and non-pharmacological interventions (e.g. acupuncture, educational and behavioural interventions). Quasi-randomised trials and cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion; none were identified. Trials using a cross-over design were not eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the results of the search to select potentially relevant trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence, using the GRADE approach. We did not pool results in a meta-analysis, but reported them per study.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five trials (1208 postpartum mothers); three RCTs and two quasi-RCTs. Four trials compared a laxative with placebo; one compared a laxative plus a bulking agent versus the same laxative alone, in women who underwent surgical repair of third degree perineal tears. Trials were poorly reported, and four of the five trials were published over 40 years ago. We judged the risk of bias to be unclear for most domains. Overall, we found a high risk of selection and attrition bias. Laxative versus placebo We included four trials in this comparison. Two of the trials examined the effects of laxatives that are no longer used; one has been found to have carcinogenic properties (Danthron), and the other is not recommended for lactating women (Bisoxatin acetate); therefore, we did not include their results in our main findings. None of the trials included in this comparison assessed our primary outcomes: pain or straining on defecation, incidence of postpartum constipation, or quality of life; or many of our secondary outcomes. A laxative (senna) may increase the number of women having their first bowel movement within 24 hours after delivery (risk ratio (RR) 2.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.24 to 3.75; 1 trial, 471 women; low-certainty evidence); may have little or no effect on the number of women having their first bowel movement on day one after delivery (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.22; 1 trial, 471 women; very low-certainty evidence); may reduce the number of women having their first bowel movement on day two (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.45; 1 trial, 471 women; low-certainty evidence); and day three (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.89; 1 trial, 471 women; low-certainty evidence); and may have little or no effect on the number of women having their first bowel movement on day four after delivery (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.87; 1 trial, 471 women; very low-certainty evidence), but some of the evidence is very uncertain. Adverse effects were poorly reported. Low-certainty evidence suggests that the laxative (senna) may increase the number of women experiencing abdominal cramps (RR 4.23, 95% CI 1.75 to 10.19; 1 trial, 471 women). Very low-certainty evidence suggests that laxatives taken by the mother may have little or no effect on loose stools in the baby (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.41; 1 trial, 281 babies); or diarrhoea (RR 2.46, 95% CI 0.23 to 26.82; 1 trial, 281 babies). Laxative plus bulking agent versus laxative only Very low-certainty evidence from one trial (147 women) suggests no evidence of a difference between these two groups of women who underwent surgical repair of third degree perineal tears; only median and range data were reported. The trial also reported no evidence of a difference in the incidence of postpartum constipation (data not reported), but did not report on quality of life. Time to first bowel movement was reported as a median (range); very low-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference between the two groups. A laxative plus bulking agent may increase the number of women having any episode of faecal incontinence during the first 10 days postpartum (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.23; 1 trial, 147 women; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report on adverse effects of the intervention on babies, or many of our secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to make general conclusions about the effectiveness and safety of laxatives for preventing postpartum constipation. The evidence in this review was assessed as low to very low-certainty evidence, with downgrading decisions based on limitations in study design, indirectness and imprecision. We did not identify any trials assessing educational or behavioural interventions. We identified four trials that examined laxatives versus placebo, and one that examined laxatives versus laxatives plus stool bulking agents. Further, rigorous trials are needed to assess the effectiveness and safety of laxatives during the postpartum period for preventing constipation. Trials should assess educational and behavioural interventions, and positions that enhance defecation. They should report on the primary outcomes from this review: pain or straining on defecation, incidence of postpartum constipation, quality of life, time to first bowel movement after delivery, and adverse effects caused by the intervention, such as: nausea or vomiting, pain, and flatus.
Topics: Adult; Constipation; Defecation; Dietary Fiber; Female; Humans; Laxatives; Perineum; Postpartum Period; Puerperal Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 32761813
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011625.pub3 -
Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and... Mar 2020Although hydrothorax may accompany abdominal ascites in women with severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), there are few cases reported with isolated pleural...
Although hydrothorax may accompany abdominal ascites in women with severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), there are few cases reported with isolated pleural effusion. Herein, we report two patients with isolated hydrothorax without any significant abdominal fluid following infertility treatment, along with a systematic review of the literature to describe risk factors for this rare entity. Two women with isolated pleural effusion without significant abdominal ascites were reported. The available literature was screened from Ovid-SP and PubMed to review OHSS cases with isolated hydrothorax. Two women aged 28 and 31 years were admitted to hospital with chest pain, tachypnea, and tachycardia after infertility treatment. They had right pleural effusion without abdominal fluid and the symptoms relieved after thoracentesis. Similar to our cases, we identified 24 case reports (n=41 women) in the literature according to eligible criteria. On the day of triggering, estradiol (E) level was <4000 pg/mL in 81% of reported cases and hematocrit (HCT) was <45% in 44% of cases at the time of diagnosis. Isolated hydrothorax is an unpredictable event, which may even complicate women with low E levels or HCT concentrations. Physicians should keep in mind the possibility of isolated hydrothorax when respiratory symptoms are significant but abdominal ascites is not evident.
PubMed: 32341834
DOI: 10.4274/tjod.galenos.2019.89656 -
Seminars in Nephrology Mar 2020To characterize current evidence and current foci of perioperative clinical trials, we systematically reviewed Medline and identified perioperative trials involving 100...
To characterize current evidence and current foci of perioperative clinical trials, we systematically reviewed Medline and identified perioperative trials involving 100 or more adult patients undergoing surgery and reporting renal end points that were published in high-impact journals since 2004. We categorized the 101 trials identified based on the nature of the intervention and summarized major trial findings from the five categories most applicable to perioperative management of patients. Trials that targeted ischemia suggested that increasing perioperative renal oxygen delivery with inotropes or blood transfusion does not reliably mitigate acute kidney injury (AKI), although goal-directed therapy with hemodynamic monitors appeared beneficial in some trials. Trials that have targeted inflammation or oxidative stress, including studies of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, steroids, N-acetylcysteine, and sodium bicarbonate, have not shown renal benefits, and high-dose perioperative statin treatment increased AKI in some patient groups in two large trials. Balanced crystalloid intravenous fluids appear safer than saline, and crystalloids appear safer than colloids. Liberal compared with restrictive fluid administration reduced AKI in a recent large trial in open abdominal surgery. Remote ischemic preconditioning, although effective in several smaller trials, failed to reduce AKI in two larger trials. The translation of promising preclinical therapies to patients undergoing surgery remains poor, and most interventions that reduced perioperative AKI compared novel surgical management techniques or existing processes of care rather than novel pharmacologic interventions.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Transfusion; Cardiotonic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Colloids; Crystalloid Solutions; Fluid Therapy; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Inflammation; Ischemia; Ischemic Preconditioning; Oxidative Stress; Perioperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Saline Solution
PubMed: 32303280
DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2020.01.008 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Jul 2020Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a life-threatening disease, and the only curative treatment relies on open or endovascular repair. The decision to treat relies on the...
OBJECTIVE
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a life-threatening disease, and the only curative treatment relies on open or endovascular repair. The decision to treat relies on the evaluation of the risk of AAA growth and rupture, which can be difficult to assess in practice. Artificial intelligence (AI) has revealed new insights into the management of cardiovascular diseases, but its application in AAA has so far been poorly described. The aim of this review was to summarize the current knowledge on the potential applications of AI in patients with AAA.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature review was performed. The MEDLINE database was searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search strategy used a combination of keywords and included studies using AI in patients with AAA published between May 2019 and January 2000. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts and performed data extraction. The search of published literature identified 34 studies with distinct methodologies, aims, and study designs.
RESULTS
AI was used in patients with AAA to improve image segmentation and for quantitative analysis and characterization of AAA morphology, geometry, and fluid dynamics. AI allowed computation of large data sets to identify patterns that may be predictive of AAA growth and rupture. Several predictive and prognostic programs were also developed to assess patients' postoperative outcomes, including mortality and complications after endovascular aneurysm repair.
CONCLUSIONS
AI represents a useful tool in the interpretation and analysis of AAA imaging by enabling automatic quantitative measurements and morphologic characterization. It could be used to help surgeons in preoperative planning. AI-driven data management may lead to the development of computational programs for the prediction of AAA evolution and risk of rupture as well as postoperative outcomes. AI could also be used to better evaluate the indications and types of surgical treatment and to plan the postoperative follow-up. AI represents an attractive tool for decision-making and may facilitate development of personalized therapeutic approaches for patients with AAA.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Artificial Intelligence; Clinical Decision-Making; Decision Support Systems, Clinical; Decision Support Techniques; Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted; Humans; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Patient Selection; Predictive Value of Tests; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32093909
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.12.026 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Perioperative fluid management is a crucial element of perioperative care and has been studied extensively recently; however, 'the right amount' remains uncertain. One... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Perioperative fluid management is a crucial element of perioperative care and has been studied extensively recently; however, 'the right amount' remains uncertain. One concept in perioperative fluid handling is goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT), wherein fluid administration targets various continuously measured haemodynamic variables with the aim of optimizing oxygen delivery. Another recently raised concept is that perioperative restrictive fluid therapy (RFT) may be beneficial and at least as effective as GDFT, with lower cost and less resource utilization.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate whether RFT may be more beneficial than GDFT for adults undergoing major non-cardiac surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases on 11 October 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, in the Cochrane Libary; MEDLINE; and Embase. Additionally, we performed a targeted search in Google Scholar and searched trial registries (World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov) for ongoing and unpublished trials. We scanned the reference lists and citations of included trials and any relevant systematic reviews identified.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative RFT versus GDFT for adults (aged ≥ 18 years) undergoing major non-cardiac surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened references for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion and consulted a third review author if necessary. When necessary, we contacted trial authors to request additional information. We presented pooled estimates for dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and for continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs) with standard deviations (SDs). We used Review Manager 5 software to perform the meta-analyses. We used a fixed-effect model if we considered heterogeneity as not important; otherwise, we used a random-effects model. We used Poisson regression models to compare the average number of complications per person.
MAIN RESULTS
From 6396 citations, we included six studies with a total of 562 participants. Five studies were performed in participants undergoing abdominal surgery (including one study in participants undergoing cytoreductive abdominal surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)), and one study was performed in participants undergoing orthopaedic surgery. In all studies, surgeries were elective. In five studies, crystalloids were used for basal infusion and colloids for boluses, and in one study, colloid was used for both basal infusion and boluses. Five studies reported the ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) status of participants. Most participants were ASA II (60.4%), 22.7% were ASA I, and only 16.9% were ASA III. No study participants were ASA IV. For the GDFT group, oesophageal doppler monitoring was used in three studies, uncalibrated invasive arterial pressure analysis systems in two studies, and a non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring system in one study. In all studies, GDFT optimization was conducted only intraoperatively. Only one study was at low risk of bias in all domains. The other five studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in one to three domains. RFT may have no effect on the rate of major complications compared to GDFT, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.34; 484 participants; 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence). RFT may increase the risk of all-cause mortality compared to GDFT, but the evidence on this is also very uncertain (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.06; 544 participants; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence). In a post-hoc analysis using a Peto odds ratio (OR) or a Poisson regression model, the odds of all-cause mortality were 4.81 times greater with the use of RFT compared to GDFT, but the evidence again is very uncertain (Peto OR 4.81, 95% CI 1.38 to 16.84; 544 participants; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Nevertheless, sensitivity analysis shows that exclusion of a study in which the final volume of fluid received intraoperatively was higher in the RFT group than in the GDFT group revealed no differences in mortality. Based on analysis of secondary outcomes, such as length of hospital stay (464 participants; 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence), surgery-related complications (364 participants; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence), non-surgery-related complications (74 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), renal failure (410 participants; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence), and quality of surgical recovery (74 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), GDFT may have no effect on the risk of these outcomes compared to RFT, but the evidence is very uncertain. Included studies provided no data on administration of vasopressors or inotropes to correct haemodynamic instability nor on cost of treatment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on very low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain whether RFT is inferior to GDFT in selected populations of adults undergoing major non-cardiac surgery. The evidence is based mainly on data from studies on abdominal surgery in a low-risk population. The evidence does not address higher-risk populations or other surgery types. Larger, higher-quality RCTs including a wider spectrum of surgery types and a wider spectrum of patient groups, including high-risk populations, are needed to determine effects of the intervention.
Topics: Fluid Therapy; Humans; Length of Stay; Perioperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Procedures, Operative
PubMed: 31829446
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012767.pub2