Randomized clinical trial of fluid restriction in colorectal surgery

The Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Compliance in Colorectal Surgery for Cancer

Background: This study aimed to assess the impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) compliance and to identify which components of this protocol are most likely to affect postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort evaluating patients who underwent elective colon resection. ERAS compliance was assessed based on adherence to the protocol components. The study examined the following outcomes: postoperative complications, readmission rates, mortality, conversion to open surgery, stoma creation, and length of hospital stay. Results: Of the 410 patients studied, 59% achieved ≥75% compliance. Comparison between compliance groups (<75% versus ≥75%) showed significant differences in overall complications (P = .002), severe complications (P = .001), and length of hospital stay (P < .001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting the absence of severe complications based on ERAS compliance was 0.677 (95% confidence interval: 0.602-0.752). Logistic regression analyses demonstrated that ERAS compliance was significantly associated with a reduced risk of severe complications (P < .001), as well as that the following items: avoiding prophylactic drains (P < .001), minimal use of postoperative opioids (P = .045), avoidance of postoperative salt and water overload (P < .001), postoperative nutritional support (P = .048), and early mobilization (P = .025). Conclusion: High ERAS compliance is associated with improved postoperative outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery. Key protocol components for preventing severe complications include avoiding prophylactic drains, minimal postoperative opioid use, avoiding salt and water overload, nutritional support, and early mobilization.

The Hemodynamic Management and Postoperative Outcomes After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Prospective Observational Study

Background: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) has become standard treatment for peritoneal cancers and metastases, significantly enhancing survival rates. This study evaluated the relationship between tumor burden, hemodynamic management, and postoperative outcomes after CRS-HIPEC. Methodology: This study included 203 patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02754115). Routine and advanced hemodynamic monitoring was performed. Data on fluid and blood transfusions, coagulation management, body temperature, blood gases, Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index (PCI), and chemotherapeutic agents used were collected. Postoperatively, complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification were employed. Primary outcomes assessed PCI's impact on hemodynamic parameters and fluid management, with secondary outcomes including postoperative complications, mortality, and length of ICU and hospital stays. Results: Patients with PCI > 20 experienced significantly longer surgeries (796.2 ± 158.3 min) as compared with patients with PCI 0-10 (551 ± 127 min) and patients with PCI between 11 and 20 (661.78 ± 137.7 min) (p ≤ 0.01). Patients with PCI > 20 received higher fluid requirements (mean: 5497.7 ± 2401.9 mL) as compared with PCI 0-10 (2631.2 ± 1459.9 mL) and PCI 10-20 (3964.65 ± 2044.6 mL) (p ≤ 0.01). Patients with PCI > 20 also had a prolonged ICU stays (median: 4 days) as compared with PCI 0-20 (median: 3 days). However, these differences were not significant in patients with PCI between 10 and 20. Significant differences in CI and SVI were observed among PCI groups during and after HIPEC. Significant differences were also observed among PCI groups for postoperative complications. Although 30-day survival rates varied clinically, they did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: A higher PCI score was significantly associated with increased duration of surgery, fluid requirements, the need for invasive hemodynamic monitoring, postoperative complications, and longer ICU stays. Tailoring perioperative strategies based on PCI scores has the potential to optimize these outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02754115.

Perioperative fluid management: evidence-based consensus recommendations from the international multidisciplinary PeriOperative Quality Initiative

Fluid therapy is an integral component of perioperative management. In light of emerging evidence in this area, the Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) convened an international multiprofessional expert meeting to generate evidence-based consensus recommendations for fluid management in patients undergoing surgery. This article provides a summary of the recommendations for perioperative fluid management of surgical patients from the preoperative period until hospital discharge and for all types of elective and emergency surgery, apart from burn injuries and head and neck surgery. Where evidence was lacking, recommendations for future research were generated. Specific recommendations are made for fluid management in elective major noncardiac surgery, cardiopulmonary bypass, thoracic surgery, neurosurgery, minor noncardiac surgery under general anaesthesia, and critical illness. There are ongoing gaps in knowledge resulting in variation in practice and some disagreement with our consensus recommendations. Perioperative fluid management should be individualised, taking into account the type of surgery and important patient factors, including intravascular volume status and acute and chronic comorbidities. Recommendations are made for further research in perioperative fluid management to address important gaps.

The association of the perioperative fluid balance and cardiopulmonary complications in emergency gastrointestinal surgery: exploration of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The association between perioperative fluid administration and risk of complications following emergency surgery is poorly studied. We tested the association between the perioperative fluid balance and postoperative complications following emergency surgery for gastrointestinal obstruction or perforation.

METHODS

We performed a re-assessment of data from the Goal-directed Fluid Therapy in Urgent Gastrointestinal Surgery Trial (GAS-ART) studying intra-operative stroke volume optimization and postoperative zero-balance fluid therapy versus standard fluid therapy. The cohort was divided into three groups at a perioperative fluid balance (FB) of low < 0 L, moderate 0-2 L, or high > 2 L. We used a propensity adjusted logistic regression to analyse the association with cardiopulmonary (primary outcome), renal, infectious, and wound healing complications. Further, the risk of complications was explored on a continuous scale of the FB.

RESULTS

We included 303 patients: 44 patients belonged to the low-FB group, 108 to the moderate-FB group, and 151 to the high-FB group. The median [interquartile range] perioperative FB was -0.9 L [-1.4, -0.6], 0.9 L [0.5, 1.3], and 3.8 L [2.7, 5.3]. The risk of cardiopulmonary complications was significantly higher in the High-FB group 3.4 (1.5-7.6), p = 0.002 (odds ratio (95% confidence interval). On a continuous scale of the fluid balance, the risk of cardiopulmonary complications was minimal at -1 L to 1 L.

CONCLUSION

Following emergency surgery for gastrointestinal obstruction or perforation, a fluid balance < 2.0 L was associated with decreased risk of cardiopulmonary complications without increasing renal complications.

Perioperative Fluid Management in Colorectal Surgery: Institutional Approach to Standardized Practice

The present review discusses restrictive perioperative fluid protocols within enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. Standardized definitions of a restrictive or liberal fluid regimen are lacking since they depend on conflicting evidence, institutional protocols, and personal preferences. Challenges related to restrictive fluid protocols are related to proper patient selection within standardized ERAS protocols. On the other hand, invasive goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is reserved for more challenging disease presentations and polymorbid and frail patients. While the perfusion rate (mL/kg/h) appears less predictive for postoperative outcomes, the authors identified critical thresholds related to total intravenous fluids and weight gain. These thresholds are discussed within the available evidence. The authors aim to introduce their institutional approach to standardized practice.

High versus standard blood pressure target in hypertensive high-risk patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery: a study protocol for the HISTAP randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The intraoperative period is often characterized by hemodynamic instability, and intraoperative hypotension is a common complication. The optimal mean arterial pressure (MAP) target in hypertensive patients is still not clear. We hereby describe the protocol and detailed statistical analysis plan for the high versus standard blood pressure target in hypertensive high-risk patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery: the HISTAP randomized clinical trial. The HISTAP trial aims at addressing whether the use of a higher intraoperative MAP target in high-risk hypertensive surgical patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery would improve postoperative outcomes, as compared to the standard and recommended perioperative MAP, by using a composite outcome including a 30-day mortality from surgical intervention and at least one major organ dysfunction or new onset of sepsis and septic shock occurring 7 days after surgery.

METHODS

The HISTAP trial is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, parallel-grouped, randomized, stratified, analyst-blinded trial with adequate allocation sequence generation, and allocation concealment. We will allocate 636 patients to a MAP target ≥ 80 mmHg (treatment group) or to a MAP target ≥65 mmHg (control group). The primary outcome is a composite outcome including a 30-day mortality from the operation and major organ complications. Secondary outcomes are mortality at 30 days, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, ICU readmission, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores recorded up to postoperative day 7, overall intraoperative fluid balance, vasopressors use, and the need for reoperation. An unadjusted χ2 test will be used for the primary outcome analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model will be used to adjust the association between the primary outcome and baseline covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

The HISTAP trial results will provide important evidence to guide clinicians' choice regarding the intraoperative MAP target in high-risk hypertensive patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery.

Impact of fluid and haemodynamic management in cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy on postoperative outcomes - A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cytoreduction surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is an extensive surgery associated with significant fluid shift and blood loss. The haemodynamic management and fluid therapy protocol may impact postoperative outcomes. This systematic review was conducted to find the effect of haemodynamic monitoring and perioperative fluid therapy in CRS-HIPEC on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar. All studies published between 2010 and 2022 involving CRS-HIPEC surgeries that compared the effect of fluid therapy and haemodynamic monitoring on postoperative outcomes were included. Keywords for database searches included a combination of Medical Subject Headings terms and plain text related to the CRS-HIPEC procedure. The risk of bias and the certainty assessment were done by Risk of Bias-2 and the methodological index for non-randomised studies.

RESULTS

The review included 16 published studies out of 388 articles. The studies were heterogeneous concerning the design type and parameter measures. The studies with goal-directed fluid therapy protocol had a duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay that varied from 1 to 20 days, while mortality varied from 0% to 9.5%. The choice of fluid, crystalloid versus colloid, remains inconclusive. The studies that compared crystalloids and colloids for perioperative fluid management did not show a difference in clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The interpretation of the available literature is challenging because the definitions of various fluid regimens and haemodynamic goals are not uniform among studies. An individualised approach to perioperative fluid therapy and a justified dynamic index cut-off for haemodynamic monitoring seem reasonable for CRS-HIPEC procedures.

Pulse Pressure Variation-Based Intraoperative Fluid Management Versus Traditional Fluid Management for Colon Cancer Patients Undergoing Open Mass Resection and Anastomosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Bowel edema leads to decreased perfusion and oxygenation of the intestine at the anastomotic site after colonic mass resection with failure of healing and leakage. Additionally, dehydration causes bowel hypoperfusion and difficulty healing with more complications. Fluid therapy guided by dynamic monitoring of fluid response can help avoid bowel dehydration and edema with fewer complications.

Objectives

The main goal of this study was to compare the effects of intraoperative fluid therapy based on pulse pressure variation (PPV) to traditional fluid therapy to maintain adequate hydration without intraoperative instability of hemodynamics and postoperative complications.

Methods

This randomized controlled study was conducted on 90 adult patients (age range: 18-70 years) undergoing elective open colonic mass resection and anastomosis at Eldemerdash Hospital, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. There were two groups of patients, namely group A (n = 45; conventional fluid management [CFM] group) and group B (n = 45; goal-guided fluid management [GGFM] group based on PPV), using randomly generated data from a computer. Intraoperative fluids and vasopressors were given using GGFM or routine care. The key tool for directing hemodynamic management in the GGFM algorithm was the fluid protocol and PPV. As a result, the outcomes were measured to include the volume of intraoperative fluid, water fraction, and postoperative complications.

Results

In this study, 90 patients underwent analysis. Both groups' demographics were similar (P > 0.05). Baseline characteristics and surgical procedures did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). Both the amount of urine output and the intraoperative administration of crystalloids were statistically significantly higher in group A (P < 0.05). The two groups' heart rate, mean arterial pressure and intraoperative usage of colloids and ephedrine were not statistically different (P > 0.05). Water fraction, bowel recovery, anastomotic leak, and length of hospital stay were significantly higher in the CFM group (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

For patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I - II undergoing elective open resection of colonic mass and anastomosis, PPV-based GGFM, a less invasive tool for intraoperative fluid management, might be a better option than CFM.

Fluid management and vasopressor use during colorectal surgery: the search for the optimal balance

BACKGROUND

Although it is known that excessive intraoperative fluid and vasopressor agents are detrimental for anastomotic healing, optimal anesthesiology protocols for colorectal surgery are currently lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To scrutinize the current hemodynamic practice and vasopressor use and their relation to colorectal anastomotic leakage.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of a previously published prospective observational study: the LekCheck study.

STUDY SETTING

Adult patients undergoing a colorectal resection with the creation of a primary anastomosis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) within 30 days postoperatively, hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 1548 patients, 579 (37%) received vasopressor agents during surgery. Of these, 201 were treated with solely noradrenaline, 349 were treated with phenylephrine, and 29 received ephedrine. CAL rate significantly differed between the patients receiving vasopressor agents during surgery compared to patients without (11.8% vs 6.3%, p < 0.001). CAL was significantly higher in the group receiving phenylephrine compared to noradrenaline (14.3% vs 6%, p < 0.001). Vasopressor agents were used more often in patients treated with Goal Directed Therapy (47% vs 34.6%, p < 0.001). There was a higher mortality rate in patients with vasopressors compared to the group without (2.8% vs 0.4%, p = 0.01, OR 3.8). Mortality was higher in the noradrenaline group compared to the phenylephrine and those without vasopressors (5% vs. 0.4% and 1.7%, respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, patients with intraoperative vasopressor agents had an increased risk to develop CAL (OR 2.1, CI 1.3-3.2, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present study contributes to the evidence that intraoperative use of vasopressor agents is associated with a higher rate of CAL. This study helps to create awareness on the (necessity to) use of vasopressor agents in colorectal surgery patients in striving for successful anastomotic wound healing. Future research will be required to balance vasopressor agent dosage in view of colorectal anastomotic leakage.

Restricted Versus Liberal Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy for Non-vascular Abdominal Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

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.

Favorable Impact on Postoperative Abdominal Symptoms in Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol

BACKGROUND/AIM

This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Moreover, this study focused on postoperative abdominal symptoms and compared the perioperative parameters between the ERAS and conventional groups in RARP patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 37 consecutive prostate cancer patients who underwent RARP between January 2020 and September 2021. The ERAS and conventional protocols were received by 16 and 20 patients, respectively, excluding one patient with surgical complications.

RESULTS

The incidence and cumulative frequency of postoperative abdominal distention were significantly lower in the ERAS group (p=0.041 and p=0.039, respectively). Although not significant, the first flatus and defecation time tended to be shorter in the ERAS group (p=0.115 and p=0.074, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The ERAS protocol contributes to the reduction in postoperative abdominal distension for patients undergoing RARP.

Perioperative fluid administration and complications in emergency gastrointestinal surgery-an observational study

BACKGROUND

The fluid balance associated with a better outcome following emergency surgery is unknown. The aim of this study was to explore the association of the perioperative fluid balance and postoperative complications during emergency gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively included patients undergoing emergency surgery for gastrointestinal obstruction or perforation. A perioperative fluid balance of 2.5 L divided the cohort in a conservative and liberal group. Outcome was Clavien-Dindo graded complications registered 90 days postoperatively. We used logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists' classification, use of epidural analgesia, use of vasopressor, type of surgery, intraabdominal pathology, and hospital. Predicted risk of complications was demonstrated on a continuous scale of the fluid balance.

RESULTS

We included 342 patients operated between July 2014 and July 2015 from three centers. The perioperative fluid balance was 1.6 L IQR [1.0 to 2.0] in the conservative vs. 3.6 L IQR [3.0 to 5.3] in the liberal group. Odds ratio of overall 2.6 (95% CI 1.5 to 4.4), p < 0.001, and cardiopulmonary complications 3.2 (95% CI 1.9 to 5.7), p < 0.001, were increased in the liberal group. A perioperative fluid balance of 0-2 L was associated with minimal risk of cardiopulmonary complications compared to 1.5-3.5 L for renal complications.

CONCLUSION

We found a perioperative fluid balance above 2.5 L to be associated with an increased risk of overall and cardiopulmonary complications following emergency surgery for gastrointestinal obstruction or perforation. A perioperative fluid balance of 0-2 L was associated with the lowest risk of cardiopulmonary complications and 1.5-3.5 L for renal complications.

Clinical efficacy of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the application of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 136 patients who underwent RALP between August 2017 and June 2018 as the control group and a prospective analysis of 106 patients who underwent RALP between January 2019 and January 2020 as the ERAS group. ERAS focused on preoperative education, nutritional intervention, electrolyte solution intake, restrictive fluid infusion, body warming, no indwelling central venous catheter, use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), early mobilization, and eating recovery.

RESULTS

The times from RALP to the first intake of clear liquid; first ambulation; first defecation; first fluid, semi-liquid, and general diet; drain removal; and length of hospital stay (LOS) were significantly shorter, and operative time, fluid infusion within 24 hours, postoperative day (POD) 1 albumin, POD 1 hemoglobin, and POD 2 drainage were significantly higher in the ERAS group. Five patients (3.8%) in the ERAS group developed postoperative complications (urine leakage, n = 4; intestinal obstruction, n = 1), while 1 patient (0.7%) in the control group developed intestinal obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS effectively accelerated patient rehabilitation and reduced the LOS for patients undergoing RALP.

Perioperative liberal versus restrictive fluid strategies and postoperative outcomes: a systematic review and metanalysis on randomised-controlled trials in major abdominal elective surgery

Background

Postoperative 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.

Methods

Systematic 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.

Results

After 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 Registration

CRD42020218059; Registration: February 2020, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=218059.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03629-y.

Postoperative ileus-An ongoing conundrum

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus is common and is a major clinical problem. It has been widely studied in patients and in experimental models in laboratory animals. A wide variety of treatments have been tested to prevent or modify the course of this disorder.

PURPOSE

This review draws together information on animal studies of ileus with studies on human patients. It summarizes some of the conceptual advances made in understanding the mechanisms that underlie paralytic ileus. The treatments that have been tested in human subjects (both pharmacological and non-pharmacological) and their efficacy are summarized and graded consistent with current clinical guidelines. The review is not intended to provide a comprehensive overview of ileus, but rather a general understanding of the major clinical problems associated with it, how animal models have been useful to elucidate key mechanisms and, finally, some perspectives from both scientists and clinicians as to how we may move forward with this debilitating yet common condition.

[Perioperative fluid management in major abdominal surgery]

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.

Perioperative fluid management for major elective surgery

BACKGROUND

Adequate fluid balance before, during and after surgery may reduce morbidity. This review examines current concepts surrounding fluid management in major elective surgery.

METHOD

A narrative review was undertaken following a PubMed search for English language reports published before July 2019 using the terms 'surgery', 'fluids', 'fluid therapy', 'colloids', 'crystalloids', 'albumin', 'starch', 'saline', 'gelatin' and 'goal directed therapy'. Additional reports were identified by examining the reference lists of selected articles.

RESULTS

Fluid therapy is a cornerstone of the haemodynamic management of patients undergoing major elective surgery. Both fluid overload and hypovolaemia are deleterious during the perioperative phase. Zero-balance fluid therapy should be aimed for. In high-risk patients, individualized haemodynamic management should be titrated through the use of goal-directed therapy. The optimal type of fluid to be administered during major surgery remains to be determined.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative fluid management is a key challenge during major surgery. Individualized volume optimization by means of goal-directed therapy is warranted during high-risk surgery. In most patients, balanced crystalloids are the first choice of fluids to be used in the operating theatre. Additional research on the optimal type of fluid for use during major surgery is needed.

Perioperative interventions for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify, appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence on the efficacy of perioperative interventions to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINHAL, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to December 2017.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials investigating short term, protocolised medical interventions conducted before, during, or after non-cardiac surgery were included. Trials with clinical diagnostic criteria for PPC outcomes were included. Studies of surgical technique or physiological or biochemical outcomes were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methods. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary outcomes were respiratory infection, atelectasis, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Trial sequential analysis was used to investigate the reliability and conclusiveness of available evidence. Adverse effects of interventions were not measured or compared.

RESULTS

117 trials enrolled 21 940 participants, investigating 11 categories of intervention. 95 randomised controlled trials enrolling 18 062 participants were included in meta-analysis; 22 trials were excluded from meta-analysis because the interventions were not sufficiently similar to be pooled. No high quality evidence was found for interventions to reduce the primary outcome (incidence of PPCs). Seven interventions had low or moderate quality evidence with confidence intervals indicating a probable reduction in PPCs: enhanced recovery pathways (risk ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.58), prophylactic mucolytics (0.40, 0.23 to 0.67), postoperative continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (0.49, 0.24 to 0.99), lung protective intraoperative ventilation (0.52, 0.30 to 0.88), prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy (0.55, 0.32 to 0.93), epidural analgesia (0.77, 0.65 to 0.92), and goal directed haemodynamic therapy (0.87, 0.77 to 0.98). Moderate quality evidence showed no benefit for incentive spirometry in preventing PPCs. Trial sequential analysis adjustment confidently supported a relative risk reduction of 25% in PPCs for prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy, epidural analgesia, enhanced recovery pathways, and goal directed haemodynamic therapies. Insufficient data were available to support or refute equivalent relative risk reductions for other interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Predominantly low quality evidence favours multiple perioperative PPC reduction strategies. Clinicians may choose to reassess their perioperative care pathways, but the results indicate that new trials with a low risk of bias are needed to obtain conclusive evidence of efficacy for many of these interventions.

STUDY REGISTRATION

Prospero CRD42016035662.

Perioperative Fluid Restriction in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Perioperative fluid management is a critical component in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. However, the benefit of restricted fluid regimen remains inconclusive. This systematic review aimed to explore potential factors causing these inconsistent findings.

METHODS

The literature searches were performed in three databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library until August 30, 2018. Only randomized, controlled trials comparing the effect of restricted versus liberal regimen in abdominal surgery were included. The primary outcome was total postoperative complications. Subgroup analysis was performed according to between-group weight increase difference (≥ 2 kg and < 2 kg) and fluid intake ratio (≥ 1.8 and < 1.8).

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were finally included in this meta-analysis. The benefit of the restricted regimen in reducing postoperative complication was only significant in the subgroup with high weight increase difference (≥ 2 kg) (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.57-0.79) and the subgroup with high fluid intake ratio (≥ 1.8) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.82). In the subgroup with low weight increase difference (< 2 kg) or low fluid intake ratio (< 1.8), the effect of the restricted regimen was not significant (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.51-1.50, and RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.91-1.53, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit of the restricted regimen was only significant in the subgroup with high weight increase difference (≥ 2 kg) or high fluid intake ratio (≥ 1.8).

The effect of intraoperative fluid administration on outcomes of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Determine the effect of intraoperative fluids (IOFs) administered during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) on postoperative patient outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients that underwent CRS/HIPEC from February 2010 to June 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 335 patients formed the cohort study. Patients who received higher IOFs had longer hospital length of stay (LOS) (34 vs. 22.5 days; P<0.001), extended intensive care unit (ICU) admission (5.3 vs. 3.2 days; P<0.001) and a 12% increase in grade 3/4 complications (P<0.001). Greater amounts of blood product transfusion were associated with longer hospital LOS (33.7 vs. 23 days; P<0.001), and ICU admission (5 vs. 3.4 days; P<0.001) and 12% increase in grade 3/4 complications (P<0.001). When corrected for weight and peritoneal cancer index (PCI), increased transfusion of blood products still resulted in longer hospital LOS (31.2 vs. 25.2 days; P=0.04) and longer ICU admission (4.7 vs. 3.6 days; P=0.03). On multivariable analysis, less blood product transfusions demonstrated a decreased LOS in hospital by 4.8 days (P=0.01) and fewer grade 3/4 complications (OR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.35-0.99; P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater IOF administration is associated with an increase in postoperative morbidity, including hospital LOS, ICU admission and grade 3/4 complications, in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.

The association between high-volume intraoperative fluid administration and outcomes among pediatric patients undergoing large bowel resection

BACKGROUND

Traditional intraoperative fluid administration practices have been challenged this century with data suggesting improved outcomes with restrictive or goal-directed fluid administration during adult bowel surgery. Minimal data on outcomes associated with differing intraoperative fluid administration practice exists for pediatric patients.

AIMS

We assessed factors and outcomes associated with high-volume fluid administration in pediatric patients undergoing colectomy. We hypothesized that high-volume fluid administration is associated with impaired recovery and, thus, increased length of stay.

METHODS

A database of perioperative practice and postoperative outcomes at a tertiary pediatric hospital was queried for colectomy encounters between July 2012 and March 2017. Data extracted included patient characteristics, perioperative clinical data, and postoperative outcomes. Encounters were stratified into two groups: greater than 90th percentile fluids administered (high-volume fluid administration group) vs less than 90th percentile fluids administered. Univariable tests, multivariable logistic regression, and propensity score matched group comparisons were used to asses outcomes associated with high-volume fluid administration.

RESULTS

A total of 209 colectomy encounters were identified from which 12 were excluded based on predetermined criteria. High-volume fluid administration was associated with length of stay >6 days (AOR 8.14, CI 1.75-37.8, P = 0.007), time to first meal >4 days (AOR of 5.91, CI 1.30-27.17, P = 0.02), and supplemental oxygen requirement >24 hours (AOR 3.60, CI 1.25-10.39, P = 0.02) after adjusting for ASA status, blood loss, transfusion, and open surgery. Similarly, propensity score matched patients with high-volume fluid administration vs controls were more likely to have length of stay >6 days (93% vs 54%, P = 0.007), time to first meal >4 days (93% vs 57%, P = 0.009), and supplemental oxygen requirement >24 hours (36% vs 12%, P = 0.033).

CONCLUSION

High-volume fluid administration during colectomy for pediatric patients is associated with worsened postoperative outcomes suggestive of impaired recovery.

Supplemental perioperative intravenous crystalloids for postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following general anaesthesia. It may be associated with patient dissatisfaction, increased costs of treatment, and unintended admission to hospital.Supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration in the perioperative period may be a simple intervention to prevent PONV.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration prevents PONV in patients undergoing surgical procedures under general anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1946 to August 2018), Embase (1947 to August 2018), and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1971 to August 2018). We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing or unpublished completed studies (August 2018), handsearched three major journals (British Journal of Anaesthesia, European Journal of Anaesthesiology, and Anesthesiology; August 2018), and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of participants older than six months undergoing surgical procedures under general anaesthesia and given supplemental perioperative intravenous crystalloids, defined as a volume larger than that received by a comparator group, to prevent PONV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures described by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 studies (4224 participants). Participants underwent ambulatory or short length of stay surgical procedures, and were predominantly American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class I or II. There is one study awaiting classification and three ongoing studies. All studies took place in surgical centres, and were conducted in geographically diverse settings. Risk of bias was generally unclear across all domains.Supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration probably reduces the cumulative risk of postoperative nausea (PON) (risk ratio (RR) 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.75; 18 studies; 1766 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). When the postoperative period was divided into early (first six hours postoperatively) and late (at the time point closest to or including 24 hours postoperatively) time points, the intervention reduced the risk of early PON (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.78; 20 studies; 2310 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and late PON (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.69; 17 studies; 1682 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration probably reduces the risk of postoperative vomiting (POV) (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.63; 20 studies; 1970 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The intervention specifically reduced both early POV (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.76; 19 studies; 1998 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and late POV (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.79; 15 studies; 1403 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration probably reduces the need for pharmacologic treatment of PONV (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.76; 23 studies; 2416 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).The effect of supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration on the risk of unplanned postoperative admission to hospital is unclear (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.43; 3 studies; 235 participants; low-certainty evidence).No studies reported serious adverse events that may occur following supplemental perioperative intravenous crystalloid administration (i.e. admission to high-dependency unit, postoperative cardiac or respiratory complication, or death).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that supplemental perioperative intravenous crystalloid administration reduces PON and POV, in ASA class I to II patients receiving general anaesthesia for ambulatory or short length of stay surgical procedures. The intervention probably also reduces the risk of pharmacologic treatment for PONV. The effect of the intervention on the risk of unintended postoperative admission to hospital is unclear. The risk of serious adverse events resulting from supplemental perioperative intravenous crystalloid administration is unknown as no studies reported this outcome. The one study awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Sublingual microcirculation in pancreatico-biliary surgery: An observational study

BACKGROUND

An observational cohort study was conducted to identify potential sublingual microcirculation parameters as a target for goal-directed fluid therapy.

METHODS

Patients that were scheduled for an open elective pancreatico-biliary surgery in Erasmus Medical Center were included. All patients underwent sublingual microcirculatory measurement at three time points: one day before surgery (T0), within the first 24 hours after surgery (T1) and on the fourth day after surgery (T2). The following parameters were obtained: microvascular flow index (MFI (AU)), Total vessels density (TVD (mm/mm2/)), Perfused vessels density (PVD (mm/mm2)), and proportion of perfused vessels (PPV (%)).

RESULTS

Sixteen patients were included in the final analysis. The differences between the time points T1 and T0 in patients without clinical significant complication and in patients with these complications gave a significant difference for PVD small vessels (PVDs) (delta PVDs mean -0.1 vs -8.2, p=0.01) and PPV small vessels (PPVs) (delta PPVs median 7.0 % vs -15.5 %, p=0.01).

CONCLUSION

The most significant microcirculatory parameter for a perioperative complicated course is the change of PVD and PPV. In the first 24 hours after surgery, if these parameters decrease there is a high chance of a complicated perioperative course.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Restrictive Perioperative Fluid Management in Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

There is significant interest and controversy surrounding the effect of restrictive fluid management on outcomes in major gastrointestinal surgery. This has been most studied in colorectal surgery, although the literature relating to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) patients is growing. The aim of this paper was to generate a comprehensive review of the available evidence for restrictive perioperative fluid management strategies and outcomes in PD.

METHODS

MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2017. A review protocol was utilized and registered with PROSPERO. Primary citations that evaluated perioperative fluid management in PD, including those as part of a clinical pathway, were considered. The primary outcome was postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Secondary outcomes included delayed gastric emptying (DGE), complication rate, length of stay (LOS), mortality, and readmission.

RESULTS

A total of six studies involving 846 patients were included (2009-2015), of which four were RCTs. Pooled analysis of RCTs and high-quality observational studies found no effect of restrictive intraoperative fluid management on POPF, DGE, complication rate, LOS, mortality, and readmission. Only one study assessed postoperative fluid management exclusively and found prolonged LOS in patients in the restricted fluid group.

CONCLUSION

Based on results of RCTs and high-quality observational studies, intraoperative fluid restriction in PD has not been shown to significantly affect postoperative outcomes. There are too few studies assessing postoperative fluid management to draw conclusions at this time.

Anesthesia and Pain Management for Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumors in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults

BACKGROUND

Desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT) is a rare, aggressive sarcoma. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) may improve survival.

METHODS

A retrospective review of anesthetic management and postoperative pain control strategies after CRS/HIPEC for DSRCT from 2013 to 2017 was performed.

RESULTS

The review analyzed 10 CRS/HIPEC procedures performed for nine DSRCT patients with a median age of 19 years (range 10-24 years). Six of these patients were Caucasian, and seven were men. The median operative duration was 551 min (range 510-725 min), and the median anesthesia duration was 621 min (range 480-820 min). Postoperative mechanical ventilation was necessary in 5 patients for a median duration of 1 day (range 0-2 days). The median intraoperative intravenous fluid administration was 13 ml/kg/h (range 6.3-24.4 ml/kg/h), and the colloid administration was 12 ml/kg (range 0.0-53.0 ml/kg). The median blood loss was 15 ml/kg (range 6.3-77.2 ml/kg). Nine patients received intraoperative transfusion with a median red blood cell transfusion volume of 14 ml/kg (range 10.1-58.5 ml/kg). The median intraoperative urine output was 2 ml/kg/h (range 0.09-8.40 ml/kg/h), and half of the patients received intraoperative diuretics. Cisplatin was used during HIPEC for eight surgeries. Acute kidney injury was observed in two patients, one of whom required short-term dialysis. Epidural infusions were used in eight cases for a median of 4 days (range 3-5 days). Postoperative intravenous opioid use (morphine equivalent) was 0.67 mg/kg/day (range 0.1-9.2 mg/kg/day) administered for a median of 11 days (range 2-35 days).

CONCLUSION

Cytoreduction and HIPEC for DSRCT are associated with significant perioperative fluid requirements and potentially challenging pain management. Renal protective strategies should be considered for reduction of cisplatin-associated nephrotoxicity. Further investigation for a more effective, less systemically toxic HIPEC agent is warranted.

Comparison of conventional fluid management with PVI-based goal-directed fluid management in elective colorectal surgery

Intraoperative fluid management is quite important in terms of postoperative organ perfusion and complications. Different fluid management protocols are in use for this purpose. Our primary goal was to compare the effects of conventional fluid management (CFM) with the Pleth Variability Index (PVI) guided goal-directed fluid management (GDFM) protocols on the amount of crystalloids administered, blood lactate, and serum creatinine levels during the intraoperative period. The length of hospital stay was our secondary goal. Seventy ASA I–II elective colorectal surgery patients were randomly assigned to CFM or GDFM for fluid management. The hemodynamic data and the data obtained from ABG were recorded at the end of induction and during the follow-up period at 1 h intervals. In the preoperative period and at 24 h postoperatively, blood samples were taken for the measurement of hemoglobin, Na, K, Cl, serum creatinine, albumin and blood lactate. In the first 24 h after surgery, oliguria and the time of first bowel movement were recorded. Length of hospital stay was also recorded. Intraoperative crystalloid administration and urine output were statistically significantly higher in CFM group (p < 0.001, p: 0.018). The end-surgery fluid balance was significantly lower in Group GDFM. Preoperative and postoperative Na, K, Cl, serum albumin, serum creatinine, lactate and hemoglobin values were similar between the groups. The time to passage of stool was significantly short in Group-GDFM compared to Group-CFM (p = 0.016). The length of hospital stay was found to be similar in both group. PVI-guided GDFM might be an alternative to CFM in ASA I–II patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. However, further studies need to be carried out to search the efficiency and safety of PVI.

Comparison of Fast-Track Versus Conventional Surgery Protocol for Patients Undergoing Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Chinese Experience

Fast-track surgery (FTS), which includes a series of evidence-based adjustments, is expected to reduce complications, relieve surgical stress reaction, accelerate recovery, and shorten hospitalization, as well as improve safety. The aim of this study was to critically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of FTS in Chinese prostate cancer (Pca) patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). A retrospective analysis was performed on 73 consecutive Chinese Pca patients who underwent RALP and who were divided into two groups: conventional surgery (CS) and FTS. Preoperative clinical data, intraoperative characteristics, postoperative outcomes and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups. No significant differences in preoperative parameters were observed between the two groups. Compared with the CS group, the FTS group showed a significantly shorter time to first flatus, time to regular diet, postoperative hospitalization time, lower incidence of complications, and lower reactions of postoperative stress and pain. Our study demonstrates that FTS is feasible and safe for Chinese Pca patients undergoing RALP and that it accelerates recovery, attenuates surgical stress response, and reduces morbidity compared to CS.

Association of Fluid Administration With Morbidity in Cytoreductive Surgery With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

Importance

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for peritoneal cancers can be associated with significant complications. Randomized trials have demonstrated increased morbidity with liberal fluid regimens in abdominal surgery.

Objective

To investigate the association of intraoperative fluid administration and morbidity in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective analysis of information from a prospectively collected institutional database was conducted at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. A total of 133 patients from April 15, 2009, to June 23, 2016, with primary or secondary peritoneal cancers were included.

Exposures

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Morbidity associated with intraoperative fluid management calculated by the comprehensive complication index, which uses a formula combining all perioperative complications and their severities into a continuous variable from 0 to 100 in each patient.

Results

Of the 133 patients identified, 38% and 37% had diagnoses of metastatic appendiceal and colorectal cancers, respectively. Mean age was 54 (interquartile range [IQR], 47-64) years, and mean peritoneal cancer index was 13 (IQR, 7-18). Mitomycin and platinum-based chemotherapeutic agents were used in 96 (72.2%) and 37 (27.8%) of the patients, respectively. Mean intraoperative fluid (IOF) rate was 15.7 (IQR, 11.3-18.7) mL/kg/h. Mean comprehensive complication index (CCI) was 26.0 (IQR, 8.7-36.2). On multivariate analysis, age (coefficient, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.01-0.64; P = .04), IOF rate (coefficient, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.19-1.75; P = .02), and estimated blood loss (coefficient, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.01-0.03; P = .002) were independent predictors of increased CCI. In particular, patients who received greater than the mean IOF rate experienced a 43% increase in the CCI compared with patients who received less than the mean IOF rate (31.5 vs 22.0; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

Intraoperative fluid administration is associated with a significant increase in perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC. Fluid administration protocols that include standardized restrictive fluid rates can potentially help to mitigate morbidity in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.

Restrictive and liberal fluid administration in major abdominal surgery

Objectives:

To determine whether perioperative fluid restrictive administration can reduce specific postoperative complications in adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Methods:

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google scholar, and article reference lists (up to December 2015) for studies that assessed fluid therapy and morbidity or mortality in patients undergoing major abdominal surgeries. The quality of the trials was assessed using the Jadad scoring system, and a meta-analysis of the included randomized, controlled trials was conducted using Review Manager software, version 5.2.

Results:

Ten studies with a total of 1160 patients undergoing major abdominal surgeries were included. We found that perioperative restrictive fluid therapy could reduce the risk of postoperative infectious complications (odds ratio [OR]=0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.39-0.74, p=0.0001, I²=37%), pulmonary complications (OR=0.49, 95% CI: 0.26-0.93, p=0.03, I²=50%), and cardiac complications (OR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.29-0.69, p=0.0003, I²=48%), but had no effect on the risk of gastrointestinal complications (OR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.51-1.46, p=0.59, I²=0%), renal complications (OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.43-1.34, p=0.35, I²=0%), and postoperative mortality (OR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.25-1.50, p=0.29, I²=0%).

Conclusion:

Perioperative restrictive fluid administration was superior to liberal fluid administration in reducing the infectious, pulmonary and cardiac complications after major abdominal surgeries.

Impact of avoiding post-operative urinary catheters on outcomes following colorectal resection in an ERAS programme: no IDUC and ERAS programmes

BACKGROUND

The presence of an indwelling urinary catheter (IDUC) is routine following colorectal resections. In Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programmes, excessive intravenous fluids (IVFs) are avoided. This study sought to determine whether the routine absence of an IDUC following colorectal surgery improved post-operative outcomes and minimized fluid prescription.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative cohort study was performed on patients undergoing colorectal resection at a tertiary referral teaching hospital, over a 7-year period. A policy of no routine IDUC was introduced over the last 3 years. Patients were divided into cohorts based on the presence or absence of an IDUC on leaving the operating theatre. The outcomes assessed were IVF prescription, length of stay, mortality and morbidity.

RESULTS

Of the 213 resections over the time period, 131 met the inclusion criteria (87 IDUC and 44 no IDUC). There was no difference between groups with respect to baseline demographics. Fluid administration was less in the group without routine IDUC (total fluid 6.16 L versus 10.89 L; P < 0.0001, fluid in the first 24 h 3.82 L versus 5.3 L; P < 0.0001 and fluid in the first 48 h 5.15 L versus 7.23 L; P < 0.0001). Length of stay was less in the 'no IDUC' group (5.9 days versus 10.1 days; P = 0.0009). There was no difference in morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

A policy of no IDUC following colectomy was associated with a reduction in IVF administration and length of stay. A randomized controlled trial is recommended in order to more accurately determine the degree of causal relationship.

Best practice for perioperative management of patients with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC

Due to the significantly improved outcome and quality of life of patients with different tumor entities after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC, there is an increasing number of centers performing CRS and HIPEC procedures. As this procedure is technically challenging with potential high morbidity and mortality, respectively, institutional experience also in the anesthetic and intensive care departments is essential for optimal treatment and prevention of adverse events. Clinical pathways have to be developed to achieve also good results in more comorbid patients with border line indications and extensive surgical procedures. The anesthesiologist has deal with relevant fluid, blood and protein losses, increased intraabdominal pressure, systemic hypo-/hyperthermia, and increased metabolic rate in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC. It is of utmost importance to maintain or restore an adequate volume by aggressive substitution of intravenous fluids, which counteracts the increased fluid loss and venous capacitance during this procedure. Supplementary thoracic epidural analgesia, non-invasive ventilation, and physiotherapy are recommended to guarantee adequate pain therapy and postoperative extubation as well as fast-track concepts. Advanced hemodynamic monitoring is essential to help the anesthesiologist picking up information about the real-time fluid status of the patient. Preoperative preconditioning is mandatory in patients scheduled for HIPEC surgery and will result in improved outcome. Postoperatively, volume status optimization, early nutritional support, sufficient anticoagulation, and point of care coagulation management are essential. This is an extensive update on all relevant topics for anesthetists and intensivists dealing with CRS and HIPEC.

How the Nurse Anesthetist Decides to Manage Perioperative Fluid Status

PURPOSE

To determine the factors that affect how nurse anesthetists in a county in Sweden decide how to manage perioperative fluid status.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional qualitative study was conducted at two surgical wards in a county hospital.

METHODS

Sixteen nurse anesthetists were interviewed to explore how nurse anesthetists assess patients' intraoperative fluid requirements and the subsequent measures adopted.

FINDING

Three categories emerged through content analysis: clinical criteria and the thought process that drives decision making, interdependence in decision making, and uncertainty in decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed differences with regard to fluid management among nurse anesthetists in a county in Sweden. For the assessments and subsequent measures that are carried out to ensure optimal fluid therapy, more research is needed to provide evidence, and evidence-based guidelines need to be developed in Sweden.

Liberal or restrictive fluid management during elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This article reviews if a restrictive fluid management policy reduces the complication rate if compared to liberal fluid management policy during elective surgery. The PubMed database was explored by 2 independent researchers. We used the following search terms: "Blood transfusion (MESH); transfusion need; fluid therapy (MESH); permissive hypotension; fluid management; resuscitation; restrictive fluid management; liberal fluid management; elective surgery; damage control resuscitation; surgical procedures, operative (MESH); wounds (MESH); injuries (MESH); surgery; trauma patients." A secondary search in the Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library revealed no additional results. We selected randomized controlled trials performed during elective surgeries. Patients were randomly assigned to a restrictive fluid management policy or to a liberal fluid management policy during elective surgery. The patient characteristics and the type of surgery varied. All but 3 studies reported American Society of Anaesthesiologists groups 1 to 3 as the inclusion criterion. The primary outcome of interest is total number of patients with a complication and the complication rate. Secondary outcome measures are infection rate, transfusion need, postoperative rebleeding, hospital stay, and renal function. In total, 1397 patients were analyzed (693 restrictive protocol, 704 liberal protocol). Meta-analysis showed that in the restrictive group as compared with the liberal group, fewer patients experienced a complication (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.78). The total complication rate (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.64), risk of infection (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79), and transfusion rate (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66-0.99) were also lower. The postoperative rebleeding did not differ in both groups: RR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.28-2.06). We conclude that compared with a liberal fluid policy, a restrictive fluid policy in elective surgery results in a 35% reduction in patients with a complication and should be advised as the preferred fluid management policy.

Successful implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program shortens length of stay and improves postoperative pain, and bowel and bladder function after colorectal surgery

Background

Despite international data indicating that Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs, which combine evidence-based perioperative strategies, expedite recovery after surgery, few centers have successfully adopted this approach within the U.S. We describe the implementation and efficacy of an ERAS program for colorectal abdominal surgery in a tertiary teaching center in the U.S.

Methods

We used a multi-modal and continuously evolving approach to implement an ERAS program among all patients undergoing colorectal abdominal surgery at a single hospital at the University of California, San Francisco. 279 patients who participated in the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery program were compared to 245 previous patients who underwent surgery prior to implementation of the program. Primary end points were length of stay and readmission rates. Secondary end points included postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting, length of urinary catheterization, and time to first solid meal.

Results

ERAS decreased both median total hospital length of stay (6.4 to 4.4 days) and post-procedure length of stay (6.0 to 4.1 days). 30-day all-cause readmission rates decreased from 21 to 9.4 %. Pain scores improved on postoperative day 0 (3.2 to 2.1) and day 1 (3.2 to 2.6) despite decreased opioid. Median time to first solid meal decreased from 4.7 to 2.7 days and duration of urinary catheterization decreased from 74 to 46 h. Similar improvements were observed in all other secondary end points.

Conclusions

These results confirm that a multidisciplinary, iterative, team-based approach is associated with a reduction in hospital stay and an acceleration in recovery without increasing readmission rates.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-016-0223-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Goal directed hemodynamic therapy based in esophageal Doppler flow parameters: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have compared perioperative esophageal doppler monitoring (EDM) guided intravascular volume replacement strategies with conventional clinical volume replacement in surgical patients. The use of the EDM within hemodynamic algorithms is called 'goal directed hemodynamic therapy' (GDHT).

METHODS

Meta-analysis of the effects of EDM guided GDHT in adult non-cardiac surgery on postoperative complications and mortality using PRISMA methodology. A systematic search was performed in Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (last update, March 2015).

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in which perioperative GDHT was compared to other fluid management.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

Overall complications.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Mortality; number of patients with complications; cardiac, renal and infectious complications; incidence of ileus. Studies were subjected to quantifiable analysis, pre-defined subgroup analysis (stratified by surgery, type of comparator and risk); pre-defined sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA).

RESULTS

Fifty six RCTs were initially identified, 15 fulfilling the inclusion criteria, including 1,368 patients. A significant reduction was observed in overall complications associated with GDHT compared to other fluid therapy (RR=0.75; 95%CI: 0.63-0.89; P=0.0009) in colorectal, urological and high-risk surgery compared to conventional fluid therapy. No differences were found in secondary outcomes, neither in other subgroups. The impact on preventing the development of complications in patients using EDM is high, causing a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 50% for a number needed to treat (NNT)=6.

CONCLUSIONS

GDHT guided by EDM decreases postoperative complications, especially in patients undergoing colorectal surgery and high-risk surgery. However, no differences versus restrictive fluid therapy and in intermediate-risk patients were found.

Intraoperative Fluid Restriction in Pancreatic Surgery: A Double Blinded Randomised Controlled Trial

Background

Perioperative fluid restriction in a variety of operations has shown improvement of: complications, recovery of gastrointestinal function and length of stay (LOS). We investigated effects of crystalloid fluid restriction in pancreatic surgery. Our hypothesis: enhanced recovery of gastrointestinal function.

Methods

In this double-blinded randomized trial, patients scheduled to undergo pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) were randomized: standard (S:10ml/kg/hr) or restricted (R:5ml/kg/hr) fluid protocols. Primary endpoint: gastric emptying scintigraphically assessed on postoperative day 7.

Results

In 66 randomized patients, complications and 6-year survival were analyzed. 54 patients were analyzed in intention to treat: 24 S-group and 30 R-group. 32 patients actually underwent a PD and 16 patients had a palliative gastrojejunostomy bypass operation in the full protocol analysis. The median gastric emptying time (T½) was 104 minutes (S-group, 95% confidence interval: 74–369) versus 159 minutes (R-group, 95% confidence interval: 61–204) (P = 0.893, NS). Delayed gastric emptying occurred in 10 patients in the S-group and in 13 patients in the R-group (45% and 50%, P = 0.779, NS). The primary outcome parameter, gastric emptying time, did not show a statistically significant difference between groups.

Conclusion

A fluid regimen of 10ml/kg/hr or 5ml/kg/hr during pancreatic surgery did not lead to statistically significant differences in gastric emptying. A larger study would be needed to draw definite conclusions about fluid restriction in pancreatic surgery.

Trial registration

ISRCTN62621488

Assessment of the time-dependent need for stay in a high dependency unit (HDU) after major surgery by using data from an anesthesia information management system

Admittance to a high dependency unit (HDU) is expensive. Patients who receive surgical treatment with 'low anterior resection of the rectum' (LAR) or 'abdominoperineal resection of the rectum' (APR) at our hospital are routinely treated in an HDU the first 16-24 h of the postoperative (PO) period. The aim of this study was to describe the extent of HDU-specific interventions given. We included patients treated with LAR or APR at the St. Olav University Hospital (Trondheim, Norway) over a 1-year period. Physiologic data and HDU-interventions recorded during the PO-period were obtained from the anesthesia information management system (AIMS). HDU-specific interventions were defined as the need for respiratory support, fluid replacement therapy >500 ml/h, vasoactive medications, or a need for high dose opioids (morphine >7.5 mg/h i.v.). Sixty-two patients were included. Most patients needed HDU-specific interventions during the first 6 h of the PO period. After this, one-third of the patients needed one or more of the HDU-specific interventions for shorter periods of time. Another one-third of the patients had a need for HDU-specific therapies for more than ten consecutive hours, primarily an infusion of nor-epinephrine. Most patients treated with LAR or APR was in need of an HDU-specific intervention during the first 6 h of the PO-period, with a marked decline after this time period. The applied methodology, using an AIMS, demonstrates that there is great variability in individual patients' postoperative needs after major surgery, and that these needs are dynamic in their nature.

A randomized trial of goal directed vs. standard fluid therapy in cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

The use of adequate fluid therapy during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) remains controversial. The aim of the study was to assess whether the use of fluid therapy protocol combined with goal-directed therapy (GDT) is associated with a significant change in morbidity, length of hospital stay, and mortality compared to standard fluid therapy. Patients American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) II-III undergoing CRS and HIPEC were randomized into two groups. The GDT group (N = 38) received fluid therapy according to a protocol guided by monitored hemodynamic parameters. The control group (N = 42) received standard fluid therapy. We evaluated incidence of major complications, total length of hospital stay, total amount of fluids administered, and mortality rate. The incidence of major abdominal complications was 10.5% in GDT group and 38.1% in the control group (P = 0.005). The median duration of hospitalization was 19 days in GDT group and 29 days in the control group (P < 0.0001). The mortality rate was zero in GDT group vs. 9.5% in the control group (P = 0.12). GDT group received a significantly (P < 0.0001) lower amount of fluid (5812 ± 1244 ml) than the control group (8269 ± 1452 ml), with a significantly (P < 0.0001) lower volume of crystalloids (3884 ± 1003 vs. 68,528 ± 1413 ml). In CRS and HIPEC, the use of a GDT improves outcome in terms of incidence of major abdominal and systemic postoperative complications and length of hospital stay, compared to standard fluid therapy protocol.

The relationship of perioperative fluid administration to outcomes in colorectal and pancreatic surgery: a review of the literature

Optimal perioperative fluid administration in major gastrointestinal surgery remains a challenging clinical problem. Traditional dogma of a liberal approach to fluid administration in order to counteract potential hypovolemia and decreased end-organ perfusion can often result in fluid overload, perhaps negatively impacting perioperative outcomes. This hypothesis has been investigated in several types of gastrointestinal surgery. We discuss the current literature on perioperative fluid administration in colorectal and pancreatic surgery and highlight the controversies that still exist.

Perioperative restricted fluid therapy preserves immunological function in patients with colorectal cancer

AIM: To investigate the effect of perioperative restricted fluid therapy on circulating CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T lymphocyte ratio, percentage of regulatory T cells (Treg) and postoperative complications in patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS: A total of 185 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the randomized clinical trial. These patients were divided into two groups according to receipt of either perioperative standard (S, n = 89) or restricted (R, n = 96) fluid therapy. Clinical data of these patients were collected in this prospective study. Perioperative complications and cellular immunity changes (CD4⁺/CD8⁺ and Treg) were analyzed comparatively between the two groups.

RESULTS: Both during surgery and on postoperative days, the total volumes of fluids administered in the R group were significantly lower than those in the S group (1620 ± 430 mL vs 3110 ± 840 mL; 2090 ± 360 mL vs 2750 ± 570 mL; 1750 ± 260 mL vs 2740 ± 490 mL; 1620 ± 310 mL vs 2520 ± 300 mL; P < 0.05). Decreased ratios of circulating CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T lymphocytes (1.47 ± 0.28 vs 2.13 ± 0.26; 1.39 ± 0.32 vs 2.21 ± 0.24; P < 0.05) and Treg percentage values (2.79 ± 1.24 vs 4.26 ± 1.04; 2.46 ± 0.98 vs 4.30 ± 1.12; P < 0.05) were observed after surgery in both groups. However, in the R group, these values restored more quickly starting from postoperative day 2 (1.44 ± 0.24 vs 1.34 ± 0.27; 2.93 ± 1.08 vs 2.52 ± 0.96; P < 0.05). The proportion of patients with complications was significantly lower in the restricted group (36 of 89 vs 59 of 96, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: Perioperative restricted intravenous fluid regimen leads to a low postoperative complication rate and better cellular immunity preservation in patients with colorectal cancer.

Liberal or restricted fluid administration: are we ready for a proposal of a restricted intraoperative approach?

BACKGROUND

Fluid management in the perioperative period has been extensively studied but, despite that, "the right amount" still remains uncertain. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the state of the art of intraoperative fluid approach today.

DISCUSSION

In the current medical literature there are only heterogeneous viewpoints that gives the idea of how confusing the situation is. The approach to the intraoperative fluid management is complex and it should be based on human physiology and the current evidence.

SUMMARY

An intraoperative restrictive fluid approach in major surgery may be beneficial while Goal-directed Therapy should be superior to the liberal fluid strategy. Finally, we propose a rational approach currently used at our institution.

Clinical Assessment of Fluid Balance is Incomplete for Colorectal Surgical Patients

Background and Aims:

Fluid balance for the surgical patient has been proven very important for the postoperative outcome and development of complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate, for the first time in modern times, the accordance between nurse-based fluid charting (cumulated fluid balance) and body weight change for general surgical patients.

Material and Methods:

This was a descriptive study with prospectively collected data from two clinical randomized multicenter trials. A total of 113 patients from American Society of Anesthesiology group I–III undergoing elective colorectal surgery were included. Cumulated fluid balance and body weight change were charted preoperatively and daily at the same time during a postoperative period of 6 days. Differences were calculated by subtracting cumulated fluid balance from body weight change (1 g = 1 mL), and agreement was assessed by making Bland–Altman plots as well as Pearson correlations.

Results:

From day 1 to 4, the mean difference between cumulated fluid balance and body weight change was below 0.4 kg/L. On day 5 and 6, the discrepancies increased with mean differences of, respectively, 1.2 kg/L (p < 0.002*) and 2 kg/L (p < 0.0001*). Bland–Altman plots showed increasingly poor agreement for all postoperative days with wide limits of agreement, ranging from more than 6 kg/L to almost 10 kg/L. Pearson correlations were moderate to strong at all times ranging from 0.437 (day 1) to 0.758 (day 4).

Conclusions:

The accordance between cumulated fluid balance and body weight change for colorectal surgical patients is relatively good for the first four postoperative days, however, with large uncertainty, whereas on the fifth and sixth postoperative day, the discrepancy is statistically and clinically significant. The fluid chart cannot stand alone in interpretation of the patient’s fluid balance; body weight and clinical judgment is indispensable.

Perioperative fluid restriction

Perioperative fluid management of the colorectal surgical patient has evolved significantly over the last five decades. Older notions espousing aggressive hydration have been shown to be associated with increased complications. Newer data regarding fluid restriction has shown an association with improved outcomes. Management of perioperative fluid administration can be considered in three primary phases: In the preoperative phase, data suggests that avoidance of preoperative bowel preparation and avoidance of undue preoperative dehydration can improve outcomes. Although the type of intraoperative fluid given does not have a significant effect on outcome, data do suggest that a restrictive fluid regimen results in improved outcomes. Finally, in the postoperative phase of fluid management, a fluid-restrictive regimen, coupled with early enteral feeding also seems to result in improved outcomes.