Goal-Directed vs Traditional Approach to Intraoperative Fluid Therapy during Open Major Bowel Surgery: Is There a Difference?

Goal-directed therapy guided by the FloTrac sensor in major surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To provide insights into the potential benefits of goal-directed therapy guided by FloTrac in reducing postoperative complications and improving outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate goal-directed therapy guided by FloTrac in major surgery, comparing goal-directed therapy with usual care or invasive monitoring in cardiac and noncardiac surgery subgroups. The quality of the articles and evidence were evaluated with a risk of bias tool and GRADE.

RESULTS

We included 29 randomized controlled trials with 3,468 patients. Goal-directed therapy significantly reduced the duration of hospital stay (mean difference -1.43 days; 95%CI 2.07 to -0.79; I2 81%), intensive care unit stay (mean difference -0.77 days; 95%CI -1.18 to -0.36; I2 93%), and mechanical ventilation (mean difference -2.48 hours, 95%CI -4.10 to -0.86, I2 63%). There was no statistically significant difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury or hypotension, but goal-directed therapy significantly reduced the risk of heart failure or pulmonary edema (RR 0.46; 95%CI 0.23 - 0.92; I2 0%).

CONCLUSION

Goal-directed therapy guided by the FloTrac sensor improved clinical outcomes and shortened the length of stay in the hospital and intensive care unit in patients undergoing major surgery. Further research can validate these results using specific protocols and better understand the potential benefits of FloTrac beyond these outcomes.

Impact of Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy on Postoperative Outcomes in Colorectal Surgery: An Evidence-Based Review

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) or conventional fluid therapy (CFT) in improving postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal surgeries.

DESIGN

Evidence-Based Review.

METHODS

Following the guidelines outlined in the PRISMA statement, a comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Elsevier ScienceDirect, Oxford Academic, EBSCO, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and gray literature. Only randomized controlled studies and pre-appraised evidence such as systematic review with meta-analysis examining the effects of GDFT and CFT in colorectal surgery were included. The quality appraisal of the literature was conducted using the proposed algorithm described in the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Evidence Level and Quality Guide.

FINDINGS

Two systematic reviews with meta-analyses and four randomized controlled trials (RCT) involving 2018 patients were included in this review. Overall, the use of GDFT did not shorten the hospital length of stay (LOS), reduce 30-day mortality, lower overall morbidity rates, or decrease incidence of postoperative ileus. Additionally, the return of bowel function was not improved using GDFT or CFT. However, when GDFT was implemented within enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs, there was a significant reduction in hospital LOS. . When GDFT was used in a non-ERAS patient care setting, there was a significant reduction in overall morbidity rate and faster time to first flatus. All studies included in the review were categorized as Level I and rated Grade A, implying strong confidence in the true effects of GDFT on all outcome measures in the review.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of GDFT in colorectal surgery are still unclear. Considerable heterogeneity based on the types of GDFT devices, patient outcome parameters, and fluid protocols limit the application to clinical practice. Furthermore, there was limited data on the effects of GDFT in high-risk patients for colorectal surgery.

The Effect of Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy versus Standard Fluid Therapy on the Cuff Leak Gradient in Patients Undergoing Complex Spine Surgery in Prone Position

Objective  Cuff leak test is an effective and established maneuver to predict airway edema. Standard fluid therapy (SFT) based on conventional monitoring is often associated with postoperative airway edema after complex spine surgeries. We conducted this prospective randomized controlled study to compare the effect of SFT versus goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) on the cuff leak gradient (CLG) in patients undergoing complex spine surgery in prone position. Our secondary objectives were to compare the effect of SFT and GDFT on sore throat, hoarseness, and length of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay.

Materials and Methods  Thirty consecutive American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II patients (18–60 years), of either sex, scheduled for spine surgery in prone position with expected duration of surgery more than 5 hours were included. The patients were randomized into two groups of 15 each. Group S patients ( n  = 15) served as control group and received SFT intraoperatively, while patients in group G ( n  = 15) received GDFT. Standard anesthetic protocol was followed in both the groups. The CLG was defined as the difference between the cuff leak volume (CLV) after intubation (CLV _AI ) and before extubation (CLV _BE ).

Statistical Analysis and Results  CLG was significantly less in group G (group S, 137.12 mL; group G, 65.52 mL; p -value <0.001). Intravenous fluids, blood loss, and postoperative sore throat were comparatively lesser in group G, though not statistically significant. Postoperative hoarseness was significantly lower in group G ( p -value = 0.003). Duration of ICU stay in group G (19.43 hours) was significantly lower ( p -value = 0.009) than group S (24.64 hours), but length of hospital stay was comparable.

Conclusion  GDFT significantly reduces airway edema and consequently reduces CLG as compared with SFT in patients undergoing complex spine surgery in prone position. Postoperatively, it also reduces sore throat, hoarseness of voice, and duration of ICU stay.