Effect of postoperative goal-directed therapy in cancer patients undergoing high-risk surgery: a randomized clinical trial and meta-analysis

Autor: Aline Rejane Muller Gerent, Juliano Pinheiro Almeida, Evgeny Fominskiy, Giovanni Landoni, Gisele Queiroz de Oliveira, Stephanie Itala Rizk, Julia Tizue Fukushima, Claudia Marques Simoes, Ulysses Ribeiro, Clarice Lee Park, Rosana Ely Nakamura, Rafael Alves Franco, Patricia Inês Cândido, Cintia Rosa Tavares, Ligia Camara, Graziela dos Santos Rocha Ferreira, Elisangela Pinto Marinho de Almeida, Roberto Kalil Filho, Filomena Regina Barbosa Gomes Galas, Ludhmila Abrahão Hajjar
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2018
Předmět:
Zdroj: Critical Care, Vol 22, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2018)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-018-2055-4
Popis: Abstract Background Perioperative goal-directed hemodynamic therapy (GDHT) has been advocated in high-risk patients undergoing noncardiac surgery to reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality. We hypothesized that using cardiac index (CI)-guided GDHT in the postoperative period for patients undergoing high-risk surgery for cancer treatment would reduce 30-day mortality and postoperative complications. Methods A randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial was performed in a tertiary oncology hospital. All adult patients undergoing high-risk cancer surgery who required intensive care unit admission were randomly allocated to a CI-guided GDHT group or to a usual care group. In the GDHT group, postoperative therapy aimed at CI ≥ 2.5 L/min/m2 using fluids, inotropes and red blood cells during the first 8 postoperative hours. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of 30-day all-cause mortality and severe postoperative complications during the hospital stay. A meta-analysis was also conducted including all randomized trials of postoperative GDHT published from 1966 to May 2017. Results A total of 128 patients (64 in each group) were randomized. The primary outcome occurred in 34 patients of the GDHT group and in 28 patients of the usual care group (53.1% vs 43.8%, absolute difference 9.4 (95% CI, − 7.8 to 25.8); p = 0.3). During the 8-h intervention period more patients in the GDHT group received dobutamine when compared to the usual care group (55% vs 16%, p
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Externí odkaz: