Ripollés-Melchor J, Casans-Francés R, Espinosa A, Abad-Gurumeta A, Feldheiser A, López-Timoneda F, Calvo-Vecino JM. Goal directed hemodynamic therapy based in esophageal Doppler flow parameters: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 2016;
63:384-405. [PMID:
26873025 DOI:
10.1016/j.redar.2015.07.009]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2015] [Revised: 07/14/2015] [Accepted: 07/18/2015] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse