Cargando…

Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching

INTRODUCTION: Goal-directed fluid therapy strategies have been shown to benefit moderate- to high-risk surgery patients. Despite this, these strategies are often not implemented. The aim of this study was to assess a closed-loop fluid administration system in a surgical cohort and compare the result...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rinehart, Joseph, Lilot, Marc, Lee, Christine, Joosten, Alexandre, Huynh, Trish, Canales, Cecilia, Imagawa, David, Demirjian, Aram, Cannesson, Maxime
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4372998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25888403
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7
_version_ 1782363271610761216
author Rinehart, Joseph
Lilot, Marc
Lee, Christine
Joosten, Alexandre
Huynh, Trish
Canales, Cecilia
Imagawa, David
Demirjian, Aram
Cannesson, Maxime
author_facet Rinehart, Joseph
Lilot, Marc
Lee, Christine
Joosten, Alexandre
Huynh, Trish
Canales, Cecilia
Imagawa, David
Demirjian, Aram
Cannesson, Maxime
author_sort Rinehart, Joseph
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Goal-directed fluid therapy strategies have been shown to benefit moderate- to high-risk surgery patients. Despite this, these strategies are often not implemented. The aim of this study was to assess a closed-loop fluid administration system in a surgical cohort and compare the results with those for matched patients who received manual management. Our hypothesis was that the patients receiving closed-loop assistance would spend more time in a preload-independent state, defined as percentage of case time with stroke volume variation less than or equal to 12%. METHODS: Patients eligible for the study were all those over 18 years of age scheduled for hepatobiliary, pancreatic or splenic surgery and expected to receive intravascular arterial blood pressure monitoring as part of their anesthetic care. The closed-loop resuscitation target was selected by the primary anesthesia team, and the system was responsible for implementation of goal-directed fluid therapy during surgery. Following completion of enrollment, each study patient was matched to a non–closed-loop assisted case performed during the same time period using a propensity match to reduce bias. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled, 5 were ultimately excluded and 25 matched pairs were selected from among the remaining 35 patients within the predefined caliper distance. There was no significant difference in fluid administration between groups. The closed-loop group spent a significantly higher portion of case time in a preload-independent state (95 ± 6% of case time versus 87 ± 14%, P =0.008). There was no difference in case mean or final stroke volume index (45 ± 10 versus 43 ± 9 and 45 ± 11 versus 42 ± 11, respectively) or mean arterial pressure (79 ± 8 versus 83 ± 9). Case end heart rate was significantly lower in the closed-loop assisted group (77 ± 10 versus 88 ± 13, P =0.003). CONCLUSION: In this case–control study with propensity matching, clinician use of closed-loop assistance resulted in a greater portion of case time spent in a preload-independent state throughout surgery compared with manual delivery of goal-directed fluid therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02020863. Registered 19 December 2013 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4372998
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43729982015-03-26 Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching Rinehart, Joseph Lilot, Marc Lee, Christine Joosten, Alexandre Huynh, Trish Canales, Cecilia Imagawa, David Demirjian, Aram Cannesson, Maxime Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Goal-directed fluid therapy strategies have been shown to benefit moderate- to high-risk surgery patients. Despite this, these strategies are often not implemented. The aim of this study was to assess a closed-loop fluid administration system in a surgical cohort and compare the results with those for matched patients who received manual management. Our hypothesis was that the patients receiving closed-loop assistance would spend more time in a preload-independent state, defined as percentage of case time with stroke volume variation less than or equal to 12%. METHODS: Patients eligible for the study were all those over 18 years of age scheduled for hepatobiliary, pancreatic or splenic surgery and expected to receive intravascular arterial blood pressure monitoring as part of their anesthetic care. The closed-loop resuscitation target was selected by the primary anesthesia team, and the system was responsible for implementation of goal-directed fluid therapy during surgery. Following completion of enrollment, each study patient was matched to a non–closed-loop assisted case performed during the same time period using a propensity match to reduce bias. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled, 5 were ultimately excluded and 25 matched pairs were selected from among the remaining 35 patients within the predefined caliper distance. There was no significant difference in fluid administration between groups. The closed-loop group spent a significantly higher portion of case time in a preload-independent state (95 ± 6% of case time versus 87 ± 14%, P =0.008). There was no difference in case mean or final stroke volume index (45 ± 10 versus 43 ± 9 and 45 ± 11 versus 42 ± 11, respectively) or mean arterial pressure (79 ± 8 versus 83 ± 9). Case end heart rate was significantly lower in the closed-loop assisted group (77 ± 10 versus 88 ± 13, P =0.003). CONCLUSION: In this case–control study with propensity matching, clinician use of closed-loop assistance resulted in a greater portion of case time spent in a preload-independent state throughout surgery compared with manual delivery of goal-directed fluid therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02020863. Registered 19 December 2013 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-03-19 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4372998/ /pubmed/25888403 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7 Text en © Rinehart et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Rinehart, Joseph
Lilot, Marc
Lee, Christine
Joosten, Alexandre
Huynh, Trish
Canales, Cecilia
Imagawa, David
Demirjian, Aram
Cannesson, Maxime
Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
title Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
title_full Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
title_fullStr Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
title_full_unstemmed Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
title_short Closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
title_sort closed-loop assisted versus manual goal-directed fluid therapy during high-risk abdominal surgery: a case–control study with propensity matching
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4372998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25888403
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0827-7
work_keys_str_mv AT rinehartjoseph closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT lilotmarc closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT leechristine closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT joostenalexandre closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT huynhtrish closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT canalescecilia closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT imagawadavid closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT demirjianaram closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching
AT cannessonmaxime closedloopassistedversusmanualgoaldirectedfluidtherapyduringhighriskabdominalsurgeryacasecontrolstudywithpropensitymatching