A 1-year perspective on goal-directed therapy in elderly with hip fracture: Secondary outcomes

Perioperative goal-directed therapy and postoperative complications in different kind of surgical procedures: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Goal-directed therapy (GDT) aims to assure tissue perfusion, by optimizing doses and timing of fluids, inotropes, and vasopressors, through monitoring of cardiac output and other basic hemodynamic parameters. Several meta-analyses confirm that GDT can reduce postoperative complications. However, all recent evidences focused on high-risk patients and on major abdominal surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present meta-analysis is to investigate the effect of GDT on postoperative complications (defined as number of patients with a least one postoperative complication) in different kind of surgical procedures.

DATA SOURCES

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on perioperative GDT in adult surgical patients were included. The primary outcome measure was complications, defined as number of patients with at least one postoperative complication. A subgroup-analysis was performed considering the kind of surgery: major abdominal (including also major vascular), only vascular, only orthopedic surgery. and so on.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Meta-analytic techniques (analysis software RevMan, version 5.3.5, Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, England, UK) were used to combine studies using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

In 52 RCTs, 6325 patients were enrolled. Of these, 3162 were randomized to perioperative GDT and 3153 were randomized to control. In the overall population, 2836 patients developed at least one complication: 1278 (40%) were randomized to perioperative GDT, and 1558 (49%) were randomized to control. Pooled OR was 0.60 and 95% CI was 0.49-0.72. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the main result. The analysis enrolling major abdominal patients showed a significant result (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.87, p = 0.0007, 31 RCTs, 4203 patients), both in high- and low-risk patients. A significant effect was observed in those RCTs enrolling exclusively orthopedic procedures (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35-0.80, p = 0.002, 7 RCTs, 650 patients. Also neurosurgical procedures seemed to benefit from GDT (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21-0.78, p = 0.008, 2 RCTs, 208 patients). In both major abdominal and orthopedic surgery, a strategy adopting fluids and inotropes yielded significant results. The total volume of fluid was not significantly different between the GDT and the control group.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

The present meta-analysis, within the limits of the existing data, the clinical and statistical heterogeneity, suggests that GDT can reduce postoperative complication rate. Moreover, the beneficial effect of GDT on postoperative morbidity is significant on major abdominal, orthopedic and neurosurgical procedures. Several well-designed RCTs are needed to further explore the effect of GDT in different kind of surgeries.

A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Preference-Based Instruments with the Older Population

Older people (aged 65 years and over) are the fastest growing age cohort in the majority of developed countries, and the proportion of individuals defined as the oldest old (aged 80 years and over) living with physical frailty and cognitive impairment is rising. These population changes put increasing pressure on health and aged care services, thus it is important to assess the cost effectiveness of interventions targeted for older people across health and aged care sectors to identify interventions with the strongest capacity to enhance older peoples' quality of life and provide value for money. Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is a form of economic evaluation that typically uses preference-based instruments to measure and value health-related quality of life for the calculation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYS) to enable comparisons of the cost effectiveness of different interventions. A variety of generic preference-based instruments have been used to measure older people's quality of life, including the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT); Health Utility Index Mark 2 (HUI2); Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3); Short-Form-6 Dimensions (SF-6D); Assessment of Quality of Life-6 dimensions (AQoL-6D); Assessment of Quality of Life-8 dimensions (AQoL-8D); Quality of Wellbeing Scale-Self-Administered (QWB-SA); 15 Dimensions (15D); EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D); and an older person specific preference-based instrument-the Investigating Choice Experiments Capability Measure for older people (ICECAP-O). This article reviews the development and application of these instruments within the older population and discusses the issues surrounding their use with this population. Areas for further research relating to the development and application of generic preference-based instruments with populations of older people are also highlighted.