Individualized, perioperative, hemodynamic goal-directed therapy in major abdominal surgery (iPEGASUS trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Cardiac index-guided therapy to maintain optimised postinduction cardiac index in high-risk patients having major open abdominal surgery: the multicentre randomised iPEGASUS trial

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether optimising intraoperative cardiac index can reduce postoperative complications. We tested the hypothesis that maintaining optimised postinduction cardiac index during and for the first 8 h after surgery reduces the incidence of a composite outcome of complications within 28 days after surgery compared with routine care in high-risk patients having elective major open abdominal surgery.

METHODS

In three German and two Spanish centres, high-risk patients having elective major open abdominal surgery were randomised to cardiac index-guided therapy to maintain optimised postinduction cardiac index (cardiac index at which pulse pressure variation was <12%) during and for the first 8 h after surgery using intravenous fluids and dobutamine or to routine care. The primary outcome was the incidence of a composite outcome of moderate or severe complications within 28 days after surgery.

RESULTS

We analysed 318 of 380 enrolled subjects. The composite primary outcome occurred in 84 of 152 subjects (55%) assigned to cardiac index-guided therapy and in 77 of 166 subjects (46%) assigned to routine care (odds ratio: 1.87, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-3.39, P=0.038). Per-protocol analyses confirmed the results of the primary outcome analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining optimised postinduction cardiac index during and for the first 8 h after surgery did not reduce, and possibly increased, the incidence of a composite outcome of complications within 28 days after surgery compared with routine care in high-risk patients having elective major open abdominal surgery. Clinicians should not strive to maintain optimised postinduction cardiac index during and after surgery in expectation of reducing complications.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03021525.

Goal-directed therapy in cardiovascular surgery: A case series study

Hemodynamic and intravascular volume monitoring has been utilized and significantly improved thanks to the technology revolution. Goal-Directed Therapy (GDT) derived from this advanced monitoring is beneficial for complex surgeries, and it shifted the medical approaches from static therapy to more personalized functional treatments. Conventional monitoring methods such as blood pressure, heart rate, urinary output, and central venous pressure are commonly used. However, studies have shown these routine parameters often cannot precisely estimate the quality of tissue perfusion. Tissue hypoperfusion and hypoxia play a crucial role in initiating a systemic inflammatory response after prolonged surgeries, resulting in unstable hemodynamic condition of the patients. Several studies reported the importance of GDT in non-cardiac surgeries and there are few reports on cardiac surgeries. However, tissue perfusion and fluid management are more critical in complex and prolonged cardiovascular surgeries to avoid complications such as low cardiac output syndrome and renal or pulmonary dysfunction. Different advanced hemodynamic monitorings have been utilized perioperatively in cardiac surgery to help decision-making on inotrope and fluid management. In this article we present 5 cases of usefulness hemodynamic monitoring in patients who underwent cardiovascular surgeries.

Impact of the fluid challenge infusion rate on cardiac stroke volume during major spinal neurosurgery: a prospective single center randomized interventional trial

BACKGROUND

Fluid therapy, including the choice of a crystalloid or colloid infusion, the execution time of a volume bolus, and the expected volume need of a patient during surgery, varies greatly in clinical practice. Different goal directed fluid protocols have been developed, where fluid boluses guided by dynamic preload parameters are administered within a specific period.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of two fluid bolus infusion rates measured by the response of hemodynamic parameters.

DESIGN

Monocentric randomized controlled interventional trial.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENTS

Forty patients undergoing elective major spinal neurosurgery in prone position were enrolled, thirty-one were finally analyzed.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive 250 ml crystalloid and colloid boluses within 5 min (group 1) or 20 min (group 2) when pulse pressure variation (PPV) exceeded 14%.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Changes in stroke volume (SV), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and catecholamine administration.

RESULTS

Group 1 showed a greater increase in SV (P = 0.031), and MAP (P = 0.014), while group 2 still had higher PPV (P = 0.005), and more often required higher dosages of noradrenalin after fluid administration (P = 0.033). In group 1, fluid boluses improved CI (P < 0.01), SV (P < 0.01), and MAP (P < 0.01), irrespective of whether crystalloids or colloids were used. In group 2, CI and SV did not change, while MAP was slightly increased (P = 0.011) only after colloid infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

A fluid bolus within 5 min is more effective than those administered within 20 min and should therefore be the primary treatment option. Furthermore, bolus infusions administered within 20 min may result in volume overload without achieving relevant hemodynamic improvements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00022917.

The Impact of General Anesthesia on Redox Stability and Epigenetic Inflammation Pathways: Crosstalk on Perioperative Antioxidant Therapy

Worldwide, the prevalence of surgery under general anesthesia has significantly increased, both because of modern anesthetic and pain-control techniques and because of better diagnosis and the increased complexity of surgical techniques. Apart from developing new concepts in the surgical field, researchers and clinicians are now working on minimizing the impact of surgical trauma and offering minimal invasive procedures due to the recent discoveries in the field of cellular and molecular mechanisms that have revealed a systemic inflammatory and pro-oxidative impact not only in the perioperative period but also in the long term, contributing to more difficult recovery, increased morbidity and mortality, and a negative financial impact. Detailed molecular and cellular analysis has shown an overproduction of inflammatory and pro-oxidative species, responsible for augmenting the systemic inflammatory status and making postoperative recovery more difficult. Moreover, there are a series of changes in certain epigenetic structures, the most important being the microRNAs. This review describes the most important molecular and cellular mechanisms that impact the surgical patient undergoing general anesthesia, and it presents a series of antioxidant therapies that can reduce systemic inflammation.

Study designs for clinical trials applied to personalised medicine: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Personalised medicine (PM) allows treating patients based on their individual demographic, genomic or biological characteristics for tailoring the 'right treatment for the right person at the right time'. Robust methodology is required for PM clinical trials, to correctly identify groups of participants and treatments. As an initial step for the development of new recommendations on trial designs for PM, we aimed to present an overview of the study designs that have been used in this field.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

We searched (April 2020) PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for all reports in English, French, German, Italian and Spanish, describing study designs for clinical trials applied to PM. Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate resolving disagreements by consensus or by involving a third expert reviewer. We extracted information on the characteristics of trial designs and examples of current applications of these approaches. The extracted information was used to generate a new classification of trial designs for PM.

RESULTS

We identified 21 trial designs, 10 subtypes and 30 variations of trial designs applied to PM, which we classified into four core categories (namely, Master protocol, Randomise-all, Biomarker strategy and Enrichment). We found 131 clinical trials using these designs, of which the great majority were master protocols (86/131, 65.6%). Most of the trials were phase II studies (75/131, 57.2%) in the field of oncology (113/131, 86.3%). We identified 34 main features of trial designs regarding different aspects (eg, framework, control group, randomisation). The four core categories and 34 features were merged into a double-entry table to create a new classification of trial designs for PM.

CONCLUSIONS

A variety of trial designs exists and is applied to PM. A new classification of trial designs is proposed to help readers to navigate the complex field of PM clinical trials.

Hemodynamic monitoring with Hypotension Prediction Index versus arterial waveform analysis alone and incidence of perioperative hypotension

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative hypotension is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The Hypotension Prediction Index (HPI) is an advancement of the arterial waveform analysis to predict intraoperative hypotension minutes before episodes occur enabling preventive treatments. We tested the hypothesis that the HPI combined with a personalized treatment protocol reduces intraoperative hypotension when compared to arterial waveform analysis alone.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 100 adult consecutive patients undergoing moderate- or high-risk noncardiac surgery with invasive arterial pressure monitoring using either index guidance (HPI) or arterial waveform analysis (FloTrac) depending on availability (FloTrac, n = 50; HPI, n = 50). A personalized treatment protocol was applied in both groups. The primary endpoint was the incidence and duration of hypotensive events defined as MAP <65 mmHg evaluated by time-weighted average of hypotension.

RESULTS

In the FloTrac group, 42 patients (84%) experienced a hypotension while in the HPI group 26 patients (52%) were hypotensive (p = 0.001). The median (IQR) time-weighted average of hypotension in the FloTrac group was 0.27 (0.42) mmHg versus 0.10 (0.19) mmHg in the HPI group (p = 0.001). Finally, the median duration of each hypotensive event (IQR) was 2.75 (2.40) min in the FloTrac group compared to 1.00 (2.06) min in the HPI group (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the HPI combined with a personalized treatment protocol can reduce incidence and duration of hypotension when compared to arterial waveform analysis alone. This study therefore provides further evidence of the transition from prediction to actual prevention of hypotension using HPI.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a review article.

METHODS

Under the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.

Multiparametric Monitoring of Hypnosis and Nociception-Antinociception Balance during General Anesthesia-A New Era in Patient Safety Standards and Healthcare Management

The development of general anesthesia techniques and anesthetic substances has opened new horizons for the expansion and improvement of surgical techniques. Nevertheless, more complex surgical procedures have brought a higher complexity and longer duration for general anesthesia, which has led to a series of adverse events such as hemodynamic instability, under- or overdosage of anesthetic drugs, and an increased number of post-anesthetic events. In order to adapt the anesthesia according to the particularities of each patient, the multimodal monitoring of these patients is highly recommended. Classically, general anesthesia monitoring consists of the analysis of vital functions and gas exchange. Multimodal monitoring refers to the concomitant monitoring of the degree of hypnosis and the nociceptive-antinociceptive balance. By titrating anesthetic drugs according to these parameters, clinical benefits can be obtained, such as hemodynamic stabilization, the reduction of awakening times, and the reduction of postoperative complications. Another important aspect is the impact on the status of inflammation and the redox balance. By minimizing inflammatory and oxidative impact, a faster recovery can be achieved that increases patient safety. The purpose of this literature review is to present the most modern multimodal monitoring techniques to discuss the particularities of each technique.

Cardiac output estimation using pulse wave analysis-physiology, algorithms, and technologies: a narrative review

Pulse wave analysis (PWA) allows estimation of cardiac output (CO) based on continuous analysis of the arterial blood pressure (AP) waveform. We describe the physiology of the AP waveform, basic principles of PWA algorithms for CO estimation, and PWA technologies available for clinical practice. The AP waveform is a complex physiological signal that is determined by interplay of left ventricular stroke volume, systemic vascular resistance, and vascular compliance. Numerous PWA algorithms are available to estimate CO, including Windkessel models, long time interval or multi-beat analysis, pulse power analysis, or the pressure recording analytical method. Invasive, minimally-invasive, and noninvasive PWA monitoring systems can be classified according to the method they use to calibrate estimated CO values in externally calibrated systems, internally calibrated systems, and uncalibrated systems.

Perioperative non-invasive versus semi-invasive cardiac index monitoring in patients with bariatric surgery - a prospective observational study

Background

In morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery, the combination of obesity-related comorbidities, pneumoperitoneum and extreme posture changes constitutes a high risk of perioperative hemodynamic complications. Thus, an advanced hemodynamic monitoring including continuous cardiac index (CI) assessment is desirable. While invasive catheterization may bear technical difficulties, transesophageal echocardiography is contraindicated due to the surgical procedure. Evidence on the clinical reliability of alternative semi- or non-invasive cardiac monitoring devices is limited. The aim was to compare the non-invasive vascular unloading to a semi-invasive pulse contour analysis reference technique for continuous CI measurements in bariatric surgical patients.

Methods

This prospective observational study included adult patients scheduled for elective, laparoscopic bariatric surgery after obtained institutional ethics approval and written informed consent. CI measurements were performed using the vascular unloading technique (Nexfin®) and semi-invasive reference method (FloTrac™). At 10 defined measurement time points, the influence of clinically indicated body posture changes, passive leg raising, fluid bolus administration and pneumoperitoneum was evaluated pre- and intraoperatively. Correlation, Bland-Altman and concordance analyses were performed.

Results

Sixty patients (mean BMI 49.2 kg/m²) were enrolled into the study and data from 54 patients could be entered in the final analysis. Baseline CI was 3.2 ± 0.9 and 3.3 ± 0.8 l/min/m², respectively. Pooled absolute CI values showed a positive correlation (r_s = 0.76, P < 0.001) and mean bias of of − 0.16 l/min/m² (limits of agreement: − 1.48 to 1.15 l/min/m²) between the two methods. Pooled percentage error was 56.51%, missing the criteria of interchangeability (< 30%). Preoperatively, bias ranged from − 0.33 to 0.08 l/min/m² with wide limits of agreement. Correlation of CI was best (r_s = 0.82, P < 0.001) and percentage error lowest (46.34%) during anesthesia and after fluid bolus administration. Intraoperatively, bias ranged from − 0.34 to − 0.03 l/min/m² with wide limits of agreement. CI measurements correlated best during pneumoperitoneum and after fluid bolus administration (r_s = 0.77, P < 0.001; percentage error 35.95%). Trending ability for all 10 measurement points showed a concordance rate of 85.12%, not reaching the predefined Critchley criterion (> 92%).

Conclusion

Non-invasive as compared to semi-invasive CI measurements did not reach criteria of interchangeability for monitoring absolute and trending values of CI in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Trial registration

The study was registered retrospectively on June 12, 2017 with the registration number NCT03184272.

Perioperative restrictive versus goal-directed fluid therapy for adults undergoing major non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Perioperative fluid management is a crucial element of perioperative care and has been studied extensively recently; however, 'the right amount' remains uncertain. One concept in perioperative fluid handling is goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT), wherein fluid administration targets various continuously measured haemodynamic variables with the aim of optimizing oxygen delivery. Another recently raised concept is that perioperative restrictive fluid therapy (RFT) may be beneficial and at least as effective as GDFT, with lower cost and less resource utilization.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether RFT may be more beneficial than GDFT for adults undergoing major non-cardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases on 11 October 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, in the Cochrane Libary; MEDLINE; and Embase. Additionally, we performed a targeted search in Google Scholar and searched trial registries (World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov) for ongoing and unpublished trials. We scanned the reference lists and citations of included trials and any relevant systematic reviews identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative RFT versus GDFT for adults (aged ≥ 18 years) undergoing major non-cardiac surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened references for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion and consulted a third review author if necessary. When necessary, we contacted trial authors to request additional information. We presented pooled estimates for dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and for continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs) with standard deviations (SDs). We used Review Manager 5 software to perform the meta-analyses. We used a fixed-effect model if we considered heterogeneity as not important; otherwise, we used a random-effects model. We used Poisson regression models to compare the average number of complications per person.

MAIN RESULTS

From 6396 citations, we included six studies with a total of 562 participants. Five studies were performed in participants undergoing abdominal surgery (including one study in participants undergoing cytoreductive abdominal surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)), and one study was performed in participants undergoing orthopaedic surgery. In all studies, surgeries were elective. In five studies, crystalloids were used for basal infusion and colloids for boluses, and in one study, colloid was used for both basal infusion and boluses. Five studies reported the ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) status of participants. Most participants were ASA II (60.4%), 22.7% were ASA I, and only 16.9% were ASA III. No study participants were ASA IV. For the GDFT group, oesophageal doppler monitoring was used in three studies, uncalibrated invasive arterial pressure analysis systems in two studies, and a non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring system in one study. In all studies, GDFT optimization was conducted only intraoperatively. Only one study was at low risk of bias in all domains. The other five studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in one to three domains. RFT may have no effect on the rate of major complications compared to GDFT, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.34; 484 participants; 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence). RFT may increase the risk of all-cause mortality compared to GDFT, but the evidence on this is also very uncertain (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.06; 544 participants; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence). In a post-hoc analysis using a Peto odds ratio (OR) or a Poisson regression model, the odds of all-cause mortality were 4.81 times greater with the use of RFT compared to GDFT, but the evidence again is very uncertain (Peto OR 4.81, 95% CI 1.38 to 16.84; 544 participants; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Nevertheless, sensitivity analysis shows that exclusion of a study in which the final volume of fluid received intraoperatively was higher in the RFT group than in the GDFT group revealed no differences in mortality. Based on analysis of secondary outcomes, such as length of hospital stay (464 participants; 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence), surgery-related complications (364 participants; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence), non-surgery-related complications (74 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), renal failure (410 participants; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence), and quality of surgical recovery (74 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), GDFT may have no effect on the risk of these outcomes compared to RFT, but the evidence is very uncertain. Included studies provided no data on administration of vasopressors or inotropes to correct haemodynamic instability nor on cost of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain whether RFT is inferior to GDFT in selected populations of adults undergoing major non-cardiac surgery. The evidence is based mainly on data from studies on abdominal surgery in a low-risk population. The evidence does not address higher-risk populations or other surgery types. Larger, higher-quality RCTs including a wider spectrum of surgery types and a wider spectrum of patient groups, including high-risk populations, are needed to determine effects of the intervention.