Article

Goal-directed perioperative fluid management: why, when, and how?

Section of Surgical Pathophysiology 4074, Rigshospitalet Copenhagen University, Copenhagen, Denmark. .
Anesthesiology (Impact Factor: 6.17). 03/2009; 110(3):453-5. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181984217
Source: PubMed
3 Followers
 · 
54 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy (GDFT) has been previously shown to decrease complications and hospital length of stay in major colorectal surgery but the data are not specific to rectal surgery and may be potentially outdated. This study investigated whether GDFT provides clinical benefits in patients undergoing major elective rectal surgery. Methods: There were 81 consecutive patients in this cohort study. Twenty-seven patients were allotted to GDFT using the Oesophageal Doppler Monitor (ODM) and received boluses of colloid fluid based on corrected flow time and stroke volume. These patients were compared with a historical cohort of the previous 54 patients managed without the ODM. The primary endpoint of the study was 30-day total complications which were defined and graded. Secondary endpoints included hospital length of stay (LOS) and fluid volumes administered. Results: There were no differences at baseline between the two groups. Patients in the treatment group received a higher volume of colloid fluids (1000 mL vs. 500 mL; p < 0.01) but there were no differences in overall fluid volumes administered intraoperatively (3000 mL vs. 3000 mL; p = 0.41). A non-significant trend (p = 0.06) suggested that patients allotted to GDFT had decreased fluid requirement in the first 24 h after surgery. There were no differences in median total fluid volumes (12700 mL vs. 10407 mL; p = 0.95), total complications (22 [81%] vs. 44 [81%]; p = 1.00) or median hospital LOS (9 days vs. 10 days; p = 0.92) between the two groups. Conclusion: Intraoperative GDFT did not improve clinical outcomes following major elective rectal surgery. Copyright © 2014 Surgical Associates Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    International Journal of Surgery (London, England) 11/2014; 12(12):1467-1472. DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.11.010 · 1.65 Impact Factor
  • Anesthesia & Analgesia 09/2014; 119(3):731-736. DOI:10.1213/ANE.0000000000000186 · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Perioperative fluid therapy remains a highly debated topic. Its purpose is to maintain or restore effective circulating blood volume during the immediate perioperative period. Maintaining effective circulating blood volume and pressure are key components of assuring adequate organ perfusion while avoiding the risks associated with either organ hypo- or hyperperfusion. Relative to perioperative fluid therapy, three inescapable conclusions exist: overhydration is bad, underhydration is bad, and what we assume about the fluid status of our patients may be incorrect. There is wide variability of practice, both between individuals and institutions. The aims of this paper are to clearly define the risks and benefits of fluid choices within the perioperative space, to describe current evidence-based methodologies for their administration, and ultimately to reduce the variability with which perioperative fluids are administered. Based on the abovementioned acknowledgements, a group of 72 researchers, well known within the field of fluid resuscitation, were invited, via email, to attend a meeting that was held in Chicago in 2011 to discuss perioperative fluid therapy. From the 72 invitees, 14 researchers representing 7 countries attended, and thus, the international Fluid Optimization Group (FOG) came into existence. These researches, working collaboratively, have reviewed the data from 162 different fluid resuscitation papers including both operative and intensive care unit populations. This manuscript is the result of 3 years of evidence-based, discussions, analysis, and synthesis of the currently known risks and benefits of individual fluids and the best methods for administering them. The results of this review paper provide an overview of the components of an effective perioperative fluid administration plan and address both the physiologic principles and outcomes of fluid administration. We recommend that both perioperative fluid choice and therapy be individualized. Patients should receive fluid therapy guided by predefined physiologic targets. Specifically, fluids should be administered when patients require augmentation of their perfusion and are also volume responsive. This paper provides a general approach to fluid therapy and practical recommendations.
    12/2015; 4(1). DOI:10.1186/s13741-015-0014-z