Dataset Information

[Perioperative fluid management in major abdominal surgery].

ABSTRACT: Intravascular fluid administration belongs to the cornerstones of perioperative treatment with a substantial impact on surgical outcome especially with respect to major abdominal surgery. By avoidance of hypovolemia and hypervolemia, adequate perioperative fluid management significantly contributes to the reduction of insufficient tissue perfusion as a determinant of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The effective use of intravascular fluids requires detailed knowledge of the substances as well as measures to guide fluid therapy. Fluid management already starts preoperatively and should be continued in the postoperative setting (recovery room, peripheral ward) considering a patient-adjusted and surgery-adjusted hemodynamic monitoring. Communication between all team members participating in perioperative care is essential to optimize fluid management.

SUBMITTER: von der Forst M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7851019 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

[Perioperative fluid management in major abdominal surgery].

von der Forst M M Weiterer S S Dietrich M M Loos M M Lichtenstern C C Weigand M A MA Siegler B H BH

Der Anaesthesist 20210201 2

Intravascular fluid administration belongs to the cornerstones of perioperative treatment with a substantial impact on surgical outcome especially with respect to major abdominal surgery. By avoidance of hypovolemia and hypervolemia, adequate perioperative fluid management significantly contributes to the reduction of insufficient tissue perfusion as a determinant of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The effective use of intravascular fluids requires detailed knowledge of the substances as ...[more]

PMID: 33034685

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative complications impact on early and long-term patients' outcome. Appropriate perioperative fluid management is pivotal in this context; however, the most effective perioperative fluid management is still unclear. The enhanced recovery after surgery pathways recommend a perioperative zero-balance, whereas recent findings suggest a more liberal approach could be beneficial. We conducted this trial to address the impact of restrictive vs. liberal fluid approaches on overall postoperative complications and mortality.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We performed a systematic literature search using MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid) and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register databases, published from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019. We included RCTs enrolling adult patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery and comparing the use of restrictive/liberal approaches enrolling at least 15 patients in each subgroup. Studies involving cardiac, non-elective surgery, paediatric or obstetric surgeries were excluded.ResultsAfter full-text examination, the metanalysis finally included 18 studies and 5567 patients randomised to restrictive (2786 patients; 50.0%) or liberal approaches (2780 patients; 50.0%). We found no difference in the occurrence of severe postoperative complications between restrictive and liberal subgroups [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.009 (- 0.02; 0.04); p value = 0.62; I2 (95% CI) = 38.6% (0-66.9%)]. This result was confirmed also in the subgroup of five studies having a low overall risk of bias. The liberal approach was associated with lower overall renal major events, as compared to the restrictive [risk difference (95% CI) = 0.06 (0.02-0.09); p value = 0.001]. We found no difference in either early (p value = 0.33) or late (p value = 0.22) postoperative mortality between restrictive and liberal subgroups CONCLUSIONS: In major abdominal elective surgery perioperative, the choice between liberal or restrictive approach did not affect overall major postoperative complications or mortality. In a subgroup analysis, a liberal as compared to a restrictive perioperative fluid policy was associated with lower overall complication renal major events, as compared to the restrictive.Trial registrationCRD42020218059; Registration: February 2020, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=218059 .

Project description:BackgroundLumbar disc herniation is seen in 5-15% of patients with lumbar back pain and is the most common spine disorder demanding surgical correction. Spinal surgery is one of the most effective management for these patients. However, current surgical techniques still present complications such as chronic pain in 10-40% of all patients who underwent lumbar surgery, which has a significant impact on patients' quality of life. Research studies have shown that transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) may reduce the cumulative dosage of intraoperative anesthetics as well as postoperative pain medications in these patients.ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of pTEAS on pain management and clinical outcome in major spinal surgery patients.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind study to verify the effect of pTEAS in improving pain management and clinical outcome after major spinal surgery. Patients (n = 90) who underwent posterior lumbar fusion surgery were randomized into two groups: pTEAS, (n = 45) and Control (n = 45). The pTEAS group received stimulation on acupoints Zusanli (ST.36), Sanyinjiao (SP.6), Taichong (LR.3), and Neiguan (PC.6). The Control group received the same electrode placement but with no electrical output. Postoperative pain scores, intraoperative outcome, perioperative hemodynamics, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and dizziness were recorded.ResultsIntraoperative outcomes of pTEAS group compared with Control: consumption of remifentanil was significantly lower (P < 0.05); heart rate was significantly lower at the end of the operation and after tracheal extubation (P < 0.05); and there was lesser blood loss (P < 0.05). Postoperative outcomes: lower pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score during the first two days after surgery (P < 0.05); and a significantly lower rate of PONV (on postoperative Day-5) and dizziness (on postoperative Day-1 and Day-5) (P < 0.05).ConclusionpTEAS could manage pain effectively and improve clinical outcomes. It could be used as a complementary technique for short-term pain management, especially in patients undergoing major surgeries.Trial registrationChiCTR1800014634, retrospectively registered on 25/01/2018. http://medresman.org/uc/projectsh/projectedit.aspx?proj=183.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing surgery is high, especially in patients who are at risk of complications and undergoing major surgery. We hypothesize that perioperative, algorithm-driven, hemodynamic therapy based on individualized fluid status and cardiac output optimization is able to reduce mortality and postoperative moderate and severe complications as a major determinant of the patients' postoperative quality of life, as well as health care costs. METHODS/DESIGN:This is a multi-center, international, prospective, randomized trial in 380 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery including visceral, urological, and gynecological operations. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated to two treatment arms within the participating centers. Patients of the intervention group will be treated perioperatively following a specific hemodynamic therapy algorithm based on pulse-pressure variation (PPV) and individualized optimization of cardiac output assessed by pulse-contour analysis (ProAQT© device; Pulsion Medical Systems, Feldkirchen, Germany). Patients in the control group will be treated according to standard local care based on established basic hemodynamic treatment. The primary endpoint is a composite comprising the occurrence of moderate or severe postoperative complications or death within 28 days post surgery. Secondary endpoints are: (1) the number of moderate and severe postoperative complications in total, per patient and for each individual complication; (2) the occurrence of at least one of these complications on days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 28 in total and for every complication; (3) the days alive and free of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor therapy and renal replacement therapy, length of intensive care unit, and hospital stay at day 7 and day 28; and (4) mortality and quality of life, assessed by the EQ-5D-5L™ questionnaire, after 6 months. DISCUSSION:This is a large, international randomized controlled study evaluating the effect of perioperative, individualized, algorithm-driven ,hemodynamic optimization on postoperative morbidity and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Trial registration: NCT03021525 . Registered on 12 January 2017.

Dataset Information

[Perioperative fluid management in major abdominal surgery].

Publications

[Perioperative fluid management in major abdominal surgery].

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets