Liberal versus restrictive fluid administration to improve recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized, double-blind study.

Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, Hvidovre University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark.
Annals of Surgery (Impact Factor: 7.19). 12/2004; 240(5):892-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000143269.96649.3b
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of 2 levels of intraoperative fluid administration on perioperative physiology and outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Intraoperative fluid administration is variable as a result of limited knowledge of physiological and clinical effects of different fluid substitution regimens.
In a double-blind study, 48 ASA I-II patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to 15 mL/kg (group 1) or 40 mL/kg (group 2) intraoperative administration of lactated Ringer's solution (LR). All other aspects of perioperative management as well as preoperative fluid status were standardized. Primary outcome parameters were assessed repeatedly for the first 24 postoperative hours and included pulmonary function (spirometry), exercise capacity (submaximal treadmill test), cardiovascular hormonal responses, balance function, pain, nausea and vomiting, recovery, and hospital stay.
Intraoperative administration of 40 mL/kg compared with 15 mL/kg LR led to significant improvements in postoperative pulmonary function and exercise capacity and a reduced stress response (aldosterone, antidiuretic hormone, and angiotensin II). Nausea, general well-being, thirst, dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, and balance function were also significantly improved, as well as significantly more patients fulfilled discharge criteria and were discharged on the day of surgery with the high-volume fluid substitution.
Intraoperative administration of 40 mL/kg compared with 15 mL/kg LR improves postoperative organ functions and recovery and shortens hospital stay after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.


Available from: Peter Bie, Jun 26, 2014
1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The infusion of large amounts of Ringer's lactate prolongs the functional gastrointestinal recovery time and increases the number of complications after open abdominal surgery. We performed an open-labelled clinical trial to determine whether hydroxyethyl starch or Ringer's lactate exerts these adverse effects when the surgery is performed by laparoscopy. Eighty-eight patients scheduled for major abdominal cancer surgery (83% by laparoscopy) received a first-line fluid treatment with 9 ml/kg of either 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (Voluven) or Ringer's lactate, just after induction of anaesthesia; this was followed by a second-line infusion with 12 ml/kg of either starch or Ringer's lactate over 1 hour. Further therapy was managed at the discretion of the attending anaesthetist. Outcome data consisted of postoperative gastrointestinal recovery time, complications and length of hospital stay. The order of the infusions had no impact on the outcome. Both the administration of ≥ 2 L of Ringer's lactate and the development of a surgical complication were associated with a longer time period of paralytic ileus and food intolerance (two-way ANOVA, P < 0.02), but only surgical complications prolonged the length of hospital stay (P < 0.001). The independent effect of Ringer's lactate and complications of food intolerance time amounted to 2 days each. The infusion of ≥ 1 L of hydroxyethyl starch did not adversely affect gastrointestinal recovery. Ringer's lactate, but not hydroxyethyl starch, prolonged the gastrointestinal recovery time in patients undergoing laparoscopic cancer surgery. Surgical complications prolonged the hospital stay.
    BMC Anesthesiology 05/2015; 15(1):72. DOI:10.1186/s12871-015-0053-5 · 1.33 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Caudwell Xtreme Everest. , M and Martin, D and , D and Montgomery, H and Mythen, M (2008) Caudwell Xtreme Everest. and , Suppl 106 (4). 81 - 84. Full text not available from this repository. Type: Article. Title: Caudwell Xtreme Everest.
  • 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