Oesophageal Doppler Monitoring Research Articles

Clinical outcomes of a prospective randomized comparison of bioreactance monitoring versus pulse-contour analysis in a stroke-volume based goal-directed fluid resuscitation protocol in brain-dead organ donors.

Eighty percent of brain-dead (BD) organ donors develop hypotension and are frequently hypovolemic. Fluid resuscitation in a BD donor is controversial. We have previously published our 4-h goal-directed stroke volume (SV)-based fluid resuscitation protocol which significantly decreased time on vasopressors and increased transplanting four or more organs. The SV was measured by pulse-contour analysis (PCA) or an esophageal doppler monitor, both of which are invasive. Thoracic bioreactance (BR) is a non-invasive portable technology that measures SV but has not been studied in BD donors. We performed a randomized prospective comparative study of BR versus PCA technology in our fluid resuscitation protocol in BD donors. Eighty-four donors (53.1%) were randomized to BR and 74 donors to PCA (46.8%). The two groups were well matched based on 24 demographic, social, and initial laboratory factors, without any significant differences between them. There was no difference in the intravenous fluid infused over the 4-h study period [BR 2271±823vs. PCA 2230±962mL; p=.77]. There was no difference in the time to wean off vasopressors [BR 108.8±61.8vs. PCA 150.0±68min p=.07], nor in the number of donors off vasopressors at the end of the protocol [BR 16 (28.6%) vs. PCA 15 (29.4%); p=.92]. There was no difference in the total number of organs transplanted per donor [BR 3.25±1.77vs. PCA 3.22±1.75; p=.90], nor in any individual organ transplanted. BR was equivalent to PCA in clinical outcomes and provides a simple, non-invasive, portable technology to monitor fluid resuscitation in organ donors.

Agreement of cardiac output measurements by esophageal Doppler and transesophageal echocardiography with intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution during pharmacologic manipulation of hemodynamics in anesthetized dogs.

To compare cardiac output (CO) measurements by transesophageal echocardiography (TEECO) and esophageal Doppler monitor (EDMCO) with pulmonary artery thermodilution (PATDCO) in anesthetized dogs subjected to pharmacological interventions. The effect of treatments on EDM-derived indexes was also investigated. 6 healthy male dogs (10.8 ± 0.7 kg). Dogs were anesthetized with propofol and isoflurane, mechanically ventilated, and monitored with invasive mean arterial pressure (MAP), end-tidal isoflurane concentration (ETISO), PATDCO, TEECO, EDMCO, and EDM-derived indexes. Four treatments were administered to all dogs by randomization. Baseline data were collected before each treatment: (1) dobutamine infusion; (2) esmolol infusion; (3) phenylephrine infusion; and (4) ETISO > 3%. Data were collected after 10-minute stabilization and after 30 minutes of washout between treatments. Statistical tests were pairwise t test, Bland-Altman analysis, Lin's concordance correlation (ρc), and polar plot analysis with P < .05 set as significance. The mean ± SD relative bias (limits of agreement) for TEECO was 0.35 ± 25.2% (-49.1% to 49.8%) and for EDMCO was -27.2 ± 22.5% (-71.4% to 17%) versus PATDCO. The percent error for TEECO and EDMCO was 27.6% and 44.1%, respectively. The ρc value was 0.82 for TEECO and 0.66 for EDMCO. TEECO and EDMCO showed good trending ability. EDM-derived indexes displayed significant changes specific to the drug administered (P < .001). For minimally invasive CO monitoring, TEE may provide more favorable performance than EDM in clinical settings; however, EDM-derived indexes yield valuable hemodynamic information that reliably follows trends in CO, thus supporting critical decision-making in canine patients.

Haemodynamic Effects of Pimobendan during General Anaesthesia in Healthy Senior Dogs: A Prospective, Randomised, Triple-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Study.

Pimobendan is an inotropic and vasodilator drug with no sympathomimetic effects. This study aimed to evaluate the haemodynamic effects of pimobendan during anaesthesia in healthy senior dogs. A prospective, randomised, triple-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical study was conducted. Thirty-three dogs (median [range]: 9 [7, 12] years) were anaesthetised for surgical procedures. The dogs were randomly allocated into two groups: eighteen dogs received intravenous pimobendan at a dose of 0.15 mg/kg (PIMOBENDAN), and fifteen dogs received intravenous saline solutions at a dose of 0.2 mL/kg (PLACEBO). Data were recorded before, 1 min, 10 min, and 20 min after injection. Velocity-time integral (VTI), peak-velocity (PV), and mean-acceleration (MA) were measured using an oesophageal Doppler monitor (ODM). Heart rate and mean arterial pressure were also registered. The data were analysed using a two-way ANOVA for trimmed means. Statistical differences were considered if p < 0.05. Twenty minutes after injection, the VTI (13.0 cm [10.4, 22.3]), PV (95.0 [83.0, 160] m/s), and MA (12.6 [9.40, 17.0] m/s2) were significantly higher in the PIMOBENDAN group compared to the PLACEBO group (VTI: 10.5 [6.50, 17.4] cm, PV: 80.0 [62.0, 103] m/s and MA: 10.2 [7.00, 16.0] ms2). No significant differences were observed in the rest of the variables. Using pimobendan during anaesthesia increases VTI, PV, and MA, as measured by an ODM.

Non-invasive assessment of Pulse Wave Transit Time (PWTT) is a poor predictor for intraoperative fluid responsiveness: a prospective observational trial (best-PWTT study)

BackgroundAim of this study is to test the predictive value of Pulse Wave Transit Time (PWTT) for fluid responsiveness in comparison to the established fluid responsiveness parameters pulse pressure (ΔPP) and corrected flow time (FTc) during major abdominal surgery.MethodsForty patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were enrolled with continuous monitoring of PWTT (LifeScope® Modell J BSM-9101 Nihon Kohden Europe GmbH, Rosbach, Germany) and stroke volume (Esophageal Doppler Monitoring CardioQ-ODM®, Deltex Medical Ltd, Chichester, UK). In case of hypovolemia (difference in pulse pressure [∆PP] ≥ 9%, corrected flow time [FTc] ≤ 350 ms) a fluid bolus of 7 ml/kg ideal body weight was administered. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and corresponding areas under the curve (AUCs) were used to compare different methods of determining PWTT. A Wilcoxon test was used to discriminate fluid responders (increase in stroke volume of ≥ 10%) from non-responders. The predictive value of PWTT for fluid responsiveness was compared by testing for differences between ROC curves of PWTT, ΔPP and FTc using the methods by DeLong.ResultsAUCs (area under the ROC-curve) to predict fluid responsiveness for PWTT-parameters were 0.61 (raw c finger Q), 0.61 (raw c finger R), 0.57 (raw c ear Q), 0.53 (raw c ear R), 0.54 (raw non-c finger Q), 0.52 (raw non-c finger R), 0.50 (raw non-c ear Q), 0.55 (raw non-c ear R), 0.63 (∆ c finger Q), 0.61 (∆ c finger R), 0.64 (∆ c ear Q), 0.66 (∆ c ear R), 0.59 (∆ non-c finger Q), 0.57 (∆ non-c finger R), 0.57 (∆ non-c ear Q), 0.61 (∆ non-c ear R) [raw measurements vs. ∆ = respiratory variation; c = corrected measurements according to Bazett’s formula vs. non-c = uncorrected measurements; Q vs. R = start of PWTT-measurements with Q- or R-wave in ECG; finger vs. ear = pulse oximetry probe location]. Hence, the highest AUC to predict fluid responsiveness by PWTT was achieved by calculating its respiratory variation (∆PWTT), with a pulse oximeter attached to the earlobe, using the R-wave in ECG, and correction by Bazett’s formula (AUC best-PWTT 0.66, 95% CI 0.54–0.79). ∆PWTT was sufficient to discriminate fluid responders from non-responders (p = 0.029). No difference in predicting fluid responsiveness was found between best-PWTT and ∆PP (AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.51–0.79; p = 0.88), or best-PWTT and FTc (AUC 0.62, 95% CI 0.49–0.75; p = 0.68).ConclusionΔPWTT shows poor ability to predict fluid responsiveness intraoperatively. Moreover, established alternatives ΔPP and FTc did not perform better.Trial registrationPrior to enrolement on clinicaltrials.gov (NC T03280953; date of registration 13/09/2017).

Development and comparison of an esophageal Doppler monitoring-based treatment algorithm with a heart rate and blood pressure-based treatment algorithm for goal-directed fluid therapy in anesthetized dogs: A pilot study

The objective of this pilot study was to determine the feasibility of a study comparing the efficacy of an esophageal Doppler monitor (EDM)-based fluid therapy algorithm with a heart rate (HR)- and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP)-based algorithm in reducing hypotension and fluid load in anesthetized dogs. Client-owned dogs undergoing general anesthesia for surgical procedures were randomized to two groups. An EDM probe for monitoring blood flow in the descending aorta was placed in each dog before receiving a crystalloid bolus (5 mL/kg) over 5 min. Fluids were repeated in case of fluid responsiveness defined by increasing Velocity Time Integral (VTI) ≥ 10% in group EDM and by decreasing HR ≥ 5 beats/min and/or increasing MAP ≥ 3 mmHg in group standard. The feasibility outcomes included the proportion of dogs completing the study and the clinical applicability of the algorithms. The clinical outcomes were the total administered fluid volume and the duration of hypotension defined as MAP < 60 mmHg. Data was compared between groups with Mann-Whitney U-test. p < 0.05 were deemed significant. Of 25 dogs screened, 14 completed the study (56%). There were no differences in the proportion of recorded time spent in hypotension in group standard [2 (0–39)% (median (range))] and EDM [0 (0–63) %, p = 1], or the total volume of fluids [standard 8 (5–14) mL/kg/h, EDM 11 (4–20) mL/kg/h, p = 0.3]. This study declined the feasibility of a study comparing the impact of two newly developed fluid therapy algorithms on hypotension and fluid load in their current form. Clinical outcome analyses were underpowered and no differences in treatment efficacy between the groups could be determined. The conclusions drawn from this pilot study provide important information for future study designs.

"Fluid Management with Esophageal Doppler Monitoring (EDM) Versus Standard Monitoring During Perioperative Management of Patients with Pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg Position While Undergoing Robot -Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy (RALP)"

"Fluid Management with Esophageal Doppler Monitoring (EDM) Versus Standard Monitoring During Perioperative Management of Patients with Pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg Position While Undergoing Robot -Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy (RALP)"

Assessment of fluid unresponsiveness guided by lung ultrasound in abdominal surgery: a prospective cohort study

A fluid challenge can generate an infraclinical interstitial syndrome that may be detected by the appearance of B-lines by lung ultrasound. Our objective was to evaluate the appearance of B-lines as a diagnostic marker of preload unresponsiveness and postoperative complications in the operating theater. We conducted a prospective, bicentric, observational study. Adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery were included. Stroke volume (SV) was determined before and after a fluid challenge with 250 mL crystalloids (Delta-SV) using esophageal Doppler monitoring. Responders were defined by an increase of Delta-SV > 10% after fluid challenge. B-lines were collected at four bilateral predefined zones (right and left anterior and lateral). Delta-B-line was defined as the number of newly appearing B-lines after a fluid challenge. Postoperative pulmonary complications were prospectively recorded according to European guidelines. In total, 197 patients were analyzed. After a first fluid challenge, 67% of patients were responders and 33% were non-responders. Delta-B-line was significantly higher in non-responders than responders [4 (2–7) vs 1 (0–3), p < 0.0001]. Delta-B-line was able to diagnose fluid non-responders with an area under the curve of 0.74 (95% CI 0.67–0.80, p < 0.0001). The best threshold was two B-lines with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 57%. The final Delta-B-line could predict postoperative pulmonary complications with an area under the curve of 0.74 (95% CI 0.67–0.80, p = 0.0004). Delta-B-line of two or more detected in four lung ultrasound zones can be considered to be a marker of preload unresponsiveness after a fluid challenge in abdominal surgery.The objectives and procedures of the study were registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03502460; Principal investigator: Stéphane BAR, date of registration: April 18, 2018).

The correlation between Corrected Flow Time (FTc) Based on Esophageal Doppler Monitoring and Pleth Variability Index (PVI) in the Fluid Therapy in Patients undergoing Total Abdominal Hysterectomy

Background: The occurrence of bleeding during major surgeries is common and requires timely and accurate management in the prevention and treatment of hypovolemia and hemodynamic instability during and after surgery. This study evaluated the correlation and agreement between the two protocols determining the status of the hypovolemia during hysterectomy.&#x0D; Methods: This study was a randomized single-blinded clinical trial. The study population included 30 patients undergoing Total Abdominal Hysterectomy in Shariati Hospital in Tehran between 2015 and 2016. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups using a randomized table of numbers, so that in the FTc group, fluid therapy was performed based on the FTc index and in the PVI group based on the PVI index. The changes in FTc and PVI values were recorded every 5 minutes and the changes in the two indicators from the beginning to the end of the treatment were evaluated. At the beginning and end of the surgery, an arterial blood gas analysis (ABG) was also performed. The amount of bleeding during operation and urinary output were recorded in two groups.&#x0D; Results: There was no significant difference across the two groups in total fluid intake during surgery, mean volume of blood loss, mean urine output, and duration of surgery. The arterial blood gas status was also similar in both groups at the beginning and the end of the operation. We found a strong adverse correlation between FTC and PVI indices at the different time points evaluated within the surgery. In total, there was a strong correlation between the mean FTC and the mean PVI during the first hour (r=-0.765, P &lt; 0.001) and the second hour (r=-0.941, -P &lt; 0.001) of operation. Considering the cut-off point of 350msec for the FTC and 13% for the PVI in predicting hypovolemia, the agreement between the two protocols in fluid therapy during the first hour after surgery was 79.8% and 76.6%.&#x0D; Conclusion: There is a strong and significant correlation between the two FTC (with a cut off of 350) and PVI (with a cut point of 13%) to predict need for fluid therapy.

Prediction of hypotension after postural change in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy using esophageal Doppler monitoring: a prospective observational trial

Postural change from a steep Trendelenburg position to a supine position (T-off) during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) induces a considerable abrupt decrease in the mean arterial pressure (MAP). We investigated the variables for predicting postural hypotension induced by T-off using esophageal Doppler monitoring (EDM). One hundred and twenty-five patients undergoing RALP were enrolled. Data on the MAP, heart rate, stroke volume index (SVI), cardiac index, peak velocity, corrected flow time, stroke volume variation, pulse pressure variation, arterial elastance (Ea), and dynamic arterial elastance were collected before T-off and at 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 min after T-off using EDM. MAP < 60 mmHg within 10 min after T-off was considered to indicate hypotension, and 25 patients developed hypotension. The areas under the curves of the MAP, SVI, and Ea were 0.734 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.623–0.846; P < 0.001), 0.712 (95% CI 0.598–0.825; P < 0.001), and 0.760 (95% CI 0.646–0.875; P < 0.001), respectively, with threshold values of ≤ 74 mmHg, ≥ 42.5 mL/m2, and ≤ 1.08 mmHg/mL, respectively. If patients have MAP < 75 mmHg with SVI ≥ 42.5 mL/m2 or Ea ≤ 1.08 mmHg/mL before postural change from T-off during RALP, prompt management for ensuing hypotension should be considered.Trial registration: NCT03882697 (ClinicalTrial.gov, March 20, 2019).

Evaluation of the ability of haemodynamic variables obtained with minimally invasive techniques to assess fluid responsiveness in endotoxaemic Beagles

ObjectiveTo examine the ability of different haemodynamic variables recorded by minimally invasive monitoring techniques to assess fluid responsiveness (FR) in endotoxaemic Beagles. Study designProspective terminal experimental study. AnimalsA group of six healthy, purpose-bred Beagle dogs (three intact females and males), age 5–9.8 years (range) and weighing 11.4–17.9 kg. MethodsEndotoxaemic shock was induced by injecting 1 mg kg–1Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS) intravenously in six sevoflurane-anaesthetized mechanically ventilated Beagles for another project. After 10 minutes, three Ringer’s acetate boluses (10 mL kg–1) were administered each over 10 minutes with collection of haemodynamic data immediately before and after each bolus. Thereafter, arterial hypotension was treated with noradrenaline ± dexmedetomidine until arterial pressures increased to a target value. After a wash-out period of 20 minutes another three boluses of fluid were administered and measurements were repeated equally. For each fluid bolus, FR was considered positive when change (Δ) in stroke volume measured by pulmonary artery thermodilution was ≥15%. To test predictive accuracy for FR, we recorded heart rate, invasive arterial, right atrial and pulmonary capillary wedge pressures, pulse wave transit time with haemodynamic monitors, calculated pulse pressure, shock index and rate over pressure evaluation (ROPE) and measured stroke distance and corrected flow time (FTc) with oesophageal Doppler monitoring. ResultsA total of 35 measurements (19 positive and 16 negative responses) were evaluated. A FTc < 330 ms, Δ pulse pressure ≥20%, Δ shock index ≤–14% and ΔROPE ≤–17% were the most significant indicators of positive FR with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve between 0.72 and 0.74. Conclusions and clinical relevanceIn endotoxaemic Beagles, none of the assessed haemodynamic variables could predict FR with high sensitivity and specificity.

Is there still a role for the oesophageal Doppler in cardiac output monitoring?

The oesophageal Doppler monitor received early endorsement as an effective emerging medical technology, although numerous alternatives have since been widely adopted. This article examines the evidence supporting the continued use of the oesophageal Doppler.

Association of plasma and urine NGAL with acute kidney injury after elective colorectal surgery: A cohort study

BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is common in surgical patients. We aimed to investigate the validity of plasma and urine neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) in the detection of AKI and prediction of outcomes in patients undergoing major colorectal surgery. Materials and methodsThis was a pre-specified post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing oesophageal doppler and Lithium dilution cardiac output monitoring in high risk patients undergoing major colorectal surgery as part of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol in a tertiary care hospital. Plasma and urine samples for NGAL measurement were taken before surgery (T1), immediately after surgery (T2), and on postoperative day 1 (T3). AKI was defined according to the KDIGO criteria. ResultsA total of 89 patients were included of whom 12 (13.5%) developed AKI. Plasma NGAL significantly increased from T1 to T3 in both AKI (p < 0.001) and non-AKI (p = 0.048) patients, while urine NGAL did not change over time. There were no significant differences in plasma and urine NGAL in patients with and without AKI at all time points. Postoperative day 1 urine NGAL concentrations were significantly higher in non-survivors than survivors (41.2 versus 25 ng/mL, p = 0.026). One-year mortality was significantly higher in AKI patients with a raised urine NGAL compared to AKI patients without elevated urine NGAL levels. ConclusionsPlasma and urine NGAL poorly predicted AKI post-colorectal surgery. Non-survivors had higher urine NGAL results. More research is required to explore the association between NGAL and long-term outcomes.

Evaluation of esophageal Doppler monitor using various sympathomimetic drugs in Beagle dogs

Introduction: The study evaluated the use of esophageal Doppler monitor during infusion of positive inotropes and vasopressors.

Are Noninvasive Continuous Cardiac Output Monitoring Interchangeable with Esophageal Doppler?

Objective: To compare the trending ability, accuracy, and precision of non-invasive stroke volume (SV) measurement based on a bioreactance technique and measurement of the pulse wave transit time (PWTT) versus the esophageal Doppler monitoring (EDM). Materials and Methods: Two hundred twenty-seven paired measurements from 10 patients who underwent abdominal surgery under general anesthesia were included for SV measurements. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated, and Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the agreement between EDM and bioreactance (EDM-bioreactance) and between EDM and PWTT (EDM-PWTT). Results: EDM-bioreactance had a correlation coefficient of 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62 to 0.78; p&lt;0.001), bias of 0.28 ml (limits of agreement –30.92 to 31.38 ml), and percentage error of 46.82%. EDM-PWTT had a correlation coefficient of 0.48 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.72; p&lt;0.001), bias of –0.18 ml (limits of agreement –40.28 to 39.92 ml), and percentage error of 60.17%. A subgroup analysis of data from patients who underwent crystalloid loading was performed to detect the trending ability. The four-quadrant plot analysis between EDM-bioreactance and EDM-PWTT demonstrated concordance rates of 70.00% and 73.68%, respectively. Conclusion: SV measurement based on bioreactance technique and measurement of PWTT are not interchangeable with EDM. Trial registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry, TCTR 20181217003 Keywords: Stroke volume, Cardiac output, Doppler, Perioperative care, Pulse, Time

Accuracy of a multiparametric score based on pulse wave analysis for prediction of fluid responsiveness: ancillary analysis of an observational study.

PurposeThe pressure recording analytical method (PRAM) monitor is a non-invasive pulse contour cardiac output (CO) device that cannot be considered interchangeable with the gold standard for CO estimation. It, however, generates additional hemodynamic indices that need to be evaluated. Our objective was to investigate the performance of a multiparametric predictive score based on a combination of several parameters generated by the PRAM monitor to predict fluid responsiveness.MethodsSecondary analysis of a prospective observational study from April 2016 to December 2017 in two French teaching hospitals. We included critically ill patients who were monitored by esophageal Doppler monitoring and an invasive arterial line, and received a 250–500 mL crystalloid fluid challenge. The main outcome measure was the predictive score discrimination evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve.ResultsThe three baseline PRAM-derived parameters associated with fluid responsiveness in univariate analysis were pulse pressure variation, cardiac cycle efficiency, and arterial elastance (P < 0.01, P = 0.03, and P < 0.01, respectively). The median [interquartile range] predictive score, calculated after discretization of these parameters according to their optimal threshold value was 3 [2–3] in fluid responders and 1 [1–2] in fluid non-responders, respectively (P < 0.001). The area under the curve of the predictive score was 0.807 (95% confidence interval, 0.662 to 0.909; P < 0.001).ConclusionA multiparametric score combining three parameters generated by the PRAM monitor can predict fluid responsiveness with good positive and negative predictive values in intensive care unit patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s12630-020-01736-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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

Perioperative fluid management is a crucial element of perioperative care and has been studied extensively recently;however, 'the right amount' remains uncertain. One concept inperioperative fluid handling is goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT), wherein fluid administration targets variouscontinuously 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. To investigate whether RFT may be more beneficial than GDFT for adults undergoing major non-cardiac surgery. 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. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative RFT versus GDFT for adults (aged ≥ 18 years) undergoing major non-cardiac surgery. 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. 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-hocanalysis 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. 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.

Systemic Oxygen Delivery during One-Lung Ventilation: Comparison between Propofol and Sevoflurane Anaesthesia in a Randomised Controlled Trial.

Systemic oxygen delivery (DO2) is a more comprehensive marker of patient status than arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), and DO2 in the range of 330–500 mL min−1 is reportedly adequate during anaesthesia. We measured DO2 during one-lung ventilation (OLV) for thoracic surgery—where the risk of pulmonary shunt is significant, and hypoxia occurs frequently—and compared sevoflurane and propofol, the two most commonly used anaesthetics in terms of DO2. Sevoflurane impairs hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction. Thus, our hypothesis was that propofol-based anaesthesia would show a higher DO2 value than sevoflurane-based anaesthesia. This was a double-blinded randomised controlled trial conducted at a university hospital from 2017 to 2018. The study population consisted of patients scheduled for lobectomy under OLV (N = 120). Sevoflurane or propofol was titrated to a bispectral index of 40–50. Haemodynamic variables were measured during two-lung ventilation (TLV) and OLV at 15 and 45 min (OLV15 and OLV45, respectively) using oesophageal Doppler monitoring. The mean DO2 (mL min−1) was not different between the sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia groups (TLV: 680 vs. 706; OLV15: 685 vs. 703; OLV45: 759 vs. 782, respectively). SaO2 was not correlated with DO2 (r = 0.09, p = 0.100). Patients with SaO2 < 94% showed adequate DO2 (641 ± 203 mL min−1), and patients with high SaO2 (> 97%) showed inadequate DO2 (14% of measurements < 500 mL min−1). In conclusion, DO2 did not significantly differ between sevoflurane and propofol. SaO2 was not correlated with DO2 and was not informative regarding whether the patients were receiving an adequate oxygen supply. DO2 may provide additional information on patient status, which may be especially important when patients show a low SaO2.

Enhanced Recovery for Major Abdominopelvic Surgery

Over the last decade, enhanced recovery protocols have become common practice across the country at countless institutions. These protocols entail a multimodal approach to reduce the effects of surgical stress and improve outcomes.1 From a surgical standpoint, this includes the use of minimally invasive techniques and improved patient education before surgery. As anesthesiologists, this has affected the way that we must think about non per os status, fluid therapy, and perioperative pain management.This book is a concise review and breakdown of the evidence driving the enhanced recovery protocols implemented by many institutions across several surgical subspecialties. It is broken down into a total of five sections. The first three sections of the book address the application of enhanced recovery protocols in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods. The final two sections explore implementation challenges and examples of protocols that are currently being used at various institutions.The authors thoroughly present data behind the practice guidelines used for enhanced recovery protocols. There are multiple tables and charts that are easy to read and follow. For example, they break down a step-by-step algorithmic approach to the choice of hemodynamic monitoring based on preoperative patient assessment and American Society of Anesthesiologists status. The authors also review the data behind use of esophageal Doppler and stroke volume monitoring for a more goal-directed approach to fluid therapy. For anesthesiologists in particular, the book addresses many anesthetic issues, which include regional anesthesia for an opioid-sparing approach to pain management with thoracic epidurals and transverse abdominis plane blocks, as well as the use of multimodal postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis.With new incentives to have patients mobilized and discharged earlier, what once would have been a 5- to 7-day admission is now transitioning to a postoperative day two discharge. Evidence has shown that adherence to enhanced recovery protocols has not only improved short-term postoperative outcomes but also decreased morbidity and improved 5-yr survival rates.1 At the end of the book, the authors present the reader with examples of current protocols currently being used at various institutions, which should enable readers to more easily develop their own.Overall, this book is a useful resource for institutions looking to use enhanced recovery protocols. It addresses the challenges of implementing new protocols in the perioperative period, and the examples at the end serve as a useful tool. As we continue to progress toward enhanced recovery and early mobilization and discharge of patients, it will be important to address challenges and issues that come up during the perioperative period; this book does just that.

The predictability of dynamic preload indices depends on the volume of fluid challenge

This study was designed to assess the association between volume of fluid challenge (FC) and predictability of respiratory variation of stroke volume (ΔrespSV) in the operating theater.Patients undergoing intermediate/high-risk surgery and monitored by esophageal Doppler monitoring (EDM) were prospectively included. All patients were under general anesthesia and mechanically ventilated. Exclusion criteria were frequent ectopic beats or preoperative arrhythmia, right ventricular failure, and spontaneous breathing. Hemodynamic parameters and esophageal Doppler indices (SV, cardiac output, ΔrespSV) were collected before, after infusion of 250 mL, and after infusion of 500 mL of crystalloid solution. Responders were defined by a >15% increase of stroke volume after FC at each step.After infusion of a 250 mL FC, 41 patients (32%) were classified as fluid responders (R250). After infusion of a 500 mL FC, 80 patients (63%) were classified as fluid responders (R500). The predictability of ΔrespSV was fair with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.79 (95% CI 0.71–0.86, P < .001) to predict fluid responsiveness with a 250 mL FC. With an AUC of 0.94 (95% CI 0.88–0.97, P < .0001), ΔrespSV presented an excellent ability to predict fluid responsiveness with a 500-mL FC.Predictability of ΔrespSV changed with the volume of fluid infused to assess fluid responsiveness. The accuracy of ΔrespSV was higher with 500 mL than with 250 mL. Bedside studies evaluating the predictability of dynamic preload indices should define fluid responsiveness as a >15% increase of SV in response to a 500-mL FC.

Pulse pressure variation and pleth variability index as predictors of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing spinal surgery in the prone position.

BackgroundThis study investigated the ability of pulse pressure variation (PPV) and pleth variability index (PVI) to predict fluid responsiveness of patients undergoing spinal surgery in the prone position.Patients and methodsA total of 53 patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion in the prone position on a Jackson table were studied. PPV, PVI, and hemodynamic and respiratory variables were measured both before and after the administration of 6 mL/kg colloid in both the supine and prone positions. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a 15% or greater increase in stroke volume index, as assessed by esophageal Doppler monitor after fluid loading.ResultsIn the supine position, 40 patients were responders. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for PPV and PVI were 0.783 [95% CI 0.648–0.884, P<0.001] and 0.814 (95% CI 0.684–0.908, P<0.001), respectively. The optimal cut-off values of PPV and PVI were 10% (sensitivity 75%, specificity 62%) and 8% (sensitivity 78%, specificity 77%), respectively. In the prone position, 27 patients were responders. The areas under the ROC curves for PPV and PVI were 0.781 (95% CI 0.646–0.883, P<0.001) and 0.756 (95% CI 0.618–0.863, P<0.001), respectively. The optimal cut-off values of PPV and PVI were 7% (sensitivity 82%, specificity 62%) and 8% (sensitivity 67%, specificity 69%), respectively.ConclusionBoth PPV and PVI were able to predict fluid responsiveness; their predictive abilities were maintained in the prone position.