Dataset Information

Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

During general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery, there remain knowledge gaps regarding the effect of goal-directed haemodynamic therapy on patient-centred outcomes.

Methods

Included clinical trials investigated goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia in adults undergoing noncardiac surgery and reported at least one patient-centred postoperative outcome. PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant articles on March 8, 2021. Two investigators performed abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and bias assessment. The primary outcomes were mortality and hospital length of stay, whereas 15 postoperative complications were included based on availability. From a main pool of comparable trials, meta-analyses were performed on trials with homogenous outcome definitions. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE).

Results

The main pool consisted of 76 trials with intermediate risk of bias for most outcomes. Overall, goal-directed haemodynamic therapy might reduce mortality (odds ratio=0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.09) and shorten length of stay (mean difference=-0.72 days; 95% CI, -1.10 to -0.35) but with low certainty in the evidence. For both outcomes, larger effects favouring goal-directed haemodynamic therapy were seen in abdominal surgery, very high-risk surgery, and using targets based on preload variation by the respiratory cycle. However, formal tests for subgroup differences were not statistically significant. Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy decreased risk of several postoperative outcomes, but only infectious outcomes and anastomotic leakage reached moderate certainty of evidence.

Conclusions

Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia might decrease mortality, hospital length of stay, and several postoperative complications. Only infectious postoperative complications and anastomotic leakage reached moderate certainty in the evidence.

SUBMITTER: Jessen MK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8900265 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jessen Marie K MK Vallentin Mikael F MF Holmberg Mathias J MJ Bolther Maria M Hansen Frederik B FB Holst Johanne M JM Magnussen Andreas A Hansen Niklas S NS Johannsen Cecilie M CM Enevoldsen Johannes J Jensen Thomas H TH Roessler Lara L LL Lind Peter C PC Klitholm Maibritt P MP Eggertsen Mark A MA Caap Philip P Boye Caroline C Dabrowski Karol M KM Vormfenne Lasse L Høybye Maria M Henriksen Jeppe J Karlsson Carl M CM Balleby Ida R IR Rasmussen Marie S MS Pælestik Kim K Granfeldt Asger A Andersen Lars W LW

British journal of anaesthesia 20211213 3

<h4>Background</h4>During general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery, there remain knowledge gaps regarding the effect of goal-directed haemodynamic therapy on patient-centred outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>Included clinical trials investigated goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia in adults undergoing noncardiac surgery and reported at least one patient-centred postoperative outcome. PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant articles on March 8, 2021. Two investigators perf ...[more]

PMID: 34916049

Similar Datasets

Project description:In cardiovascular surgery, reduced organ perfusion and oxygen delivery contribute to increased postoperative morbidity and prolonged intensive care unit stay. Goal-directed therapy (GDT), a perioperative haemodynamic strategy aiming to increase cardiac output, is helpful in preventing postoperative complications, but studies in the context of cardiovascular surgery have produced conflicting results. The purpose of the present meta-analysis is to determine the effects of perioperative haemodynamic goal-directed therapy on mortality and morbidity in cardiac and vascular surgery. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and the DARE databases were searched until July 2011. Randomized controlled trials reporting on adult cardiac or vascular surgical patients managed with perioperative GDT or according to routine haemodynamic practice were included. Primary outcome measures were mortality and morbidity. Data synthesis was obtained by using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) by a random effects model. An OR <1 favoured GDT. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by Q and I(2) statistics. Eleven articles (five cardiac surgery and six vascular procedures), enrolling a total sample of 1179 patients, were included in the analysis. As compared with routine haemodynamic practice, perioperative GDT did not reduce mortality in either cardiac or vascular surgery (pooled OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.37-2.02; statistical power 64%). GDT significantly reduced the number of cardiac patients with complications (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.18-0.63; P = 0.0006), but no effect was observed in vascular patients (OR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.45-1.56; P = 0.58). Perioperative GDT prevents postoperative complications in cardiac surgery patients, while it has no effect in vascular surgery. The different characteristics and comorbidities of the population enrolled could explain these conflicting results. More trials conforming to the characteristics of low-risk-of-bias studies and enrolling a larger and well-defined population of patients are needed to better clarify the effect of GDT in the specific setting of cardiovascular surgery.

Project description:IntroductionTotal hip replacement is one of the most commonly performed major orthopaedic operations. Goal-directed therapy (GDT) using haemodynamic monitoring has previously demonstrated outcome benefits in high-risk surgical patients under general anaesthesia. GDT has never been formally assessed during regional anaesthesia.MethodsPatients undergoing total hip replacement while under regional anaesthesia were randomised to either the control group (CTRL) or the protocol group (GDT). Patients in the GDT group, in addition to standard monitoring, were connected to the FloTrac sensor/Vigileo monitor haemodynamic monitoring system, and a GDT protocol was used to maximise the stroke volume and target the oxygen delivery index to > 600 mL/minute/m2.ResultsPatients randomised to the GDT group were given a greater volume of intravenous fluids during the intraoperative period (means ± standard deviation (SD): 6,032 ± 1,388 mL vs. 2,635 ± 346 mL; P < 0.0001), and more of the GDT patients received dobutamine (0 of 20 CTRL patients vs. 11 of 20 GDT patients; P < 0.0003). The GDT patients also received more blood transfused during the intraoperative period (means ± SD: 595 ± 316 mL vs. 0 ± 0 mL; P < 0.0001), although the CTRL group received greater volumes of blood replacement postoperatively (CTRL patients 658 ± 68 mL vs. GDT patients 198 ± 292 mL; P < 0.001). Overall blood consumption (intraoperatively and postoperatively) was not different between the two groups. There were an increased number of complications in the CTRL group (20 of 20 CTRL patients (100%) vs. 16 of 20 GDT patients (80%); P = 0.05). These outcomes were predominantly due to a difference in minor complications (20 of 20 CTRL patients (100%) vs. 15 of 20 GDT patients (75%); P = 0.047).ConclusionsGDT applied during regional anaesthesia in patients undergoing elective total hip replacement changes intraoperative fluid management and may improve patient outcomes by decreasing postoperative complications. Larger trials are required to confirm our findings.

Project description:BackgroundPerioperative 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.MethodsWe 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 I 2 statistics.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionsThis 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.

Project description:BackgroundAppropriate perioperative fluid management is of pivotal importance to reduce postoperative complications, which impact on early and long-term patient outcome. The so-called perioperative goal-directed therapy (GDT) approach aims at customizing perioperative fluid management on the individual patients' hemodynamic response. Whether or not the overall amount of perioperative volume infused in the context of GDT could influence postoperative surgical outcomes is unclear.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of GDT approach between study population and control group in reducing postoperative complications and perioperative mortality, using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register. The enrolled studies were grouped considering the amount infused intraoperatively and during the first 24 h after the admission in the critical care unit (perioperative fluid).ResultsThe metanalysis included 21 RCTs enrolling 2729 patients with a median amount of perioperative fluid infusion of 4500 ml. In the studies reporting an overall amount below or above this threshold, the differences in postoperative complications were not statically significant between controls and GDT subgroup [43.4% vs. 34.2%, p value = 0.23 and 54.8% vs. 39.8%; p value = 0.09, respectively]. Overall, GDT reduced the overall rate of postoperative complications, as compared to controls [pooled risk difference (95% CI) = - 0.10 (- 0.14, - 0.07); Chi2 = 30.97; p value < 0.0001], but not to a reduction of perioperative mortality [pooled risk difference (95%CI) = - 0.016 (- 0.0334; 0.0014); p value = 0.07]. Considering the rate of organ-related postoperative events, GDT did not reduce neither renal (p value = 0.52) nor cardiovascular (p value = 0.86) or pulmonary (p value = 0.14) or neurological (p value = 0.44) or infective (p value = 0.12) complications.ConclusionsIrrespectively to the amount of perioperative fluid administered, GDT strategy reduces postoperative complications, but not perioperative mortality.Trial registrationCRD42020168866; Registration: February 2020 https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=168866.

Project description:Dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness have been developed and investigated in clinical trials of goal-directed therapy. The impact of this approach on clinically relevant outcomes is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate whether fluid therapy guided by dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness compared with standard care improves clinically relevant outcomes in adults admitted to the ICU.Randomized controlled trials from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to December 2016, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles.Two reviewers independently identified randomized controlled trials comparing dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness with standard care for acute volume resuscitation in adults admitted to the ICU.Two reviewers independently abstracted trial-level data including population characteristics, interventions, clinical outcomes, and source of funding. Our primary outcome was mortality at longest duration of follow-up. Our secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and frequency of renal complications. The internal validity of trials was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool.We included 13 trials enrolling 1,652 patients. Methods used to assess fluid responsiveness included stroke volume variation (nine trials), pulse pressure variation (one trial), and stroke volume change with passive leg raise/fluid challenge (three trials). In 12 trials reporting mortality, the risk ratio for death associated with dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.42-0.83; I = 0%; n = 1,586). The absolute risk reduction in mortality associated with dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was -2.9% (95% CI, -5.6% to -0.2%). Dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was associated with reduced duration of ICU length of stay (weighted mean difference, -1.16 d [95% CI, -1.97 to -0.36]; I = 74%; n = 394, six trials) and mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference, -2.98 hr [95% CI, -5.08 to -0.89]; I = 34%; n = 334, five trials). Three trials were adjudicated at unclear risk of bias; the remaining trials were at high risk of bias.In adult patients admitted to intensive care who required acute volume resuscitation, goal-directed therapy guided by assessment of fluid responsiveness appears to be associated with reduced mortality, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. High-quality clinical trials in both medical and surgical ICU populations are warranted to inform routine care.

Project description:Optimal perioperative fluid management is crucial, with over- or under-replacement associated with complications. There are many strategies for fluid therapy, including liberal fluid therapy (LFT), restrictive fluid therapy (RFT) and goal-directed fluid therapy (GDT), without a clear consensus as to which is better. We aimed to find out which is the more effective fluid therapy option in adult surgical patients undergoing non-vascular abdominal surgery in the perioperative period. This study is a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) with node-splitting analysis of inconsistency, sensitivity analysis and meta-regression. We conducted a literature search of Pubmed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Web of Science. Only studies comparing restrictive, liberal and goal-directed fluid therapy during the perioperative phase in major non-cardiac surgery in adult patients will be included. Trials on paediatric patients, obstetric patients and cardiac surgery were excluded. Trials that focused on goal-directed therapy monitoring with pulmonary artery catheters and venous oxygen saturation (SvO2), as well as those examining purely biochemical and laboratory end points, were excluded. A total of 102 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 78 studies (12,100 patients) were included. NMA concluded that goal-directed fluid therapy utilising FloTrac was the most effective intervention in reducing the length of stay (LOS) (surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) = 91%, odds ratio (OR) = -2.4, 95% credible intervals (CrI) = -3.9 to -0.85) and wound complications (SUCRA = 86%, OR = 0.41, 95% CrI = 0.24 to 0.69). Goal-directed fluid therapy utilising pulse pressure variation was the most effective in reducing the complication rate (SUCRA = 80%, OR = 0.25, 95% CrI = 0.047 to 1.2), renal complications (SUCRA = 93%, OR = 0.23, 95% CrI = 0.045 to 1.0), respiratory complications (SUCRA = 74%, OR = 0.42, 95% CrI = 0.053 to 3.6) and cardiac complications (SUCRA = 97%, OR = 0.067, 95% CrI = 0.0058 to 0.57). Liberal fluid therapy was the most effective in reducing the mortality rate (SUCRA = 81%, OR = 0.40, 95% CrI = 0.12 to 1.5). Goal-directed therapy utilising oesophageal Doppler was the most effective in reducing anastomotic leak (SUCRA = 79%, OR = 0.45, 95% CrI = 0.12 to 1.5). There was no publication bias, but moderate to substantial heterogeneity was found in all networks. In preventing different complications, except mortality, goal-directed fluid therapy was consistently more highly ranked and effective than standard (SFT), liberal or restricted fluid therapy. The evidence grade was low quality to very low quality for all the results, except those for wound complications and anastomotic leak.

Dataset Information

Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy during general anaesthesia for noncardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets