Introduction
Materials and methods
Eligibility criteria
Information sources
Search terms
Study selection
Data collection process
RCT data gathered
Risk of bias in individual studies
Study | SIGN score | SIGN comment | Risk definition | Type of surgery | Goal-directed therapy (tools and goals) | Modality of optimisation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bender et al. 1997 [21], USA | - | Randomisation and concealment not clear, not blinded | Elective aortic and vascular | PAC: CI ≥ 2.8 L/minute/m2, 8 ≤ PCWP ≤ 14 mmHg, SVR ≤1,100 dyn/second/cm5 | Fluids and inotropes | |
Benes et al. 2010 [22], Europe | ++ | High risk | Major abdominal | Vigileo monitor/FloTrac sensor: SVV < 10% | Fluids and inotropes | |
Bishop et al. 1995 [23], USA | - | Randomisation not adequate, concealment not clear, not blinded | High risk | Emergent trauma | PAC: CI ≥ 4.5 L/minute/m2, DO2 ≥ 670 mL/minute/m2, VO2 ≥ 166 mL/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes |
Boyd et al. 1993 [24], Europe | - | Randomisation and concealment not clear | High risk | Emergent or elective major abdominal or vascular | PAC: DO2 > 600 mL/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes |
Chytra et al. 2007 [25], Europe | + | Randomisation not clear | High risk | Emergent trauma | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation with FTc > 0.35 seconds | Fluids (noradrenaline intraoperatively) |
Fleming et al. 1992 [26], USA | - | Randomisation not adequate, not blinded, concealment not described | High risk | Emergent trauma | PAC: CI ≥ 4.5 L/minute/m2, DO2 ≥ 670 mL/minute/m2, VO2 ≥ 166 mL/minute/m | Fluids and inotropes |
Forget et al. 2010 [27], Europe | ++ | High risk | Major abdominal | Masimo SET pulse oximeter: PVI > 13% | Fluids | |
Gan et al. 2002 [28], USA | ++ | Elective general, urologic, gynaecologic | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation with FTc between 0.35 and 0.4 seconds | Fluids | ||
Jhanji et al. 2010 [29], Europe | ++ | High risk | Major elective abdominal | LiDCO Cardiac Sensor System: SV > 10% | Fluids | |
Lobo et al. 2000 [30], Brazil | + | Randomisation not clear | High risk | Elective major abdominal or vascular | PAC: DO2 > 600 mL/minute/m2 | Fluids |
Lopes et al. 2007 [31], Brazil | + | Randomisation not clear | High risk | Elective abdominal | Radial artery line: ΔPP ≤ 10% | Fluids |
Mayer et al. 2010 [32], Europe | + | Randomisation not clear | High risk | Major abdominal | Vigileo monitor/FloTrac sensor: CI ≥ 2.5 L/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes |
McKendry et al. 2004 [33], Europe | + | Complication not defined | Elective cardiac | Oesophageal Doppler: SI > 35 mL/m2 | Fluids | |
Mythen and Webb 1995 [34], Europe | - | Randomisation not clear, flow of patients not described | High risk | Elective cardiac | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation and rise in CVP < 3 mmHg | Fluids |
Noblett et al. 2006 [35], Europe | + | Randomisation not clear | Colorectal | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation with FTc between 0.35 and 0.4 seconds | Fluids (catecholamines intraoperatively) | |
Pearse et al. 2005 [36], Europe | ++ | High risk | Elective or emergent major general | LiDCO Cardiac Sensor System: DO2 > 600 mL/minute/m2, SV > 10% | Fluids and inotropes | |
Sandham et al. 2003 [37], Canada | ++ | High risk | Elective or emergent major abdominal, thoracic, vascular, or orthopaedic | PAC: CI > 3.5 and < 4.5 L/minute/m2, 550 < DO2 < 600 mL/minute/m2, MAP > 70 mmHg, PCWP < 18 mmHg | Fluids and inotropes | |
Shoemaker et al. 1998 [38], USA | - | Not blinded, unclear dropouts and withdrawals | High risk | Emergent or elective major abdominal (general or vascular) | PAC: CI > 4.5 L/minute/m2, DO2 > 600 mL/minute/m2, VO2 > 170 mL/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes |
Sinclair et al. 1997 [39], Europe | - | Randomisation and concealment not clear, flow of patients not described | High risk | Orthopaedic | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation with FTc between 0.35 and 0.4 seconds | Fluids |
Smetkin et al. 2009 [40], Europe | - | Randomisation not adequate, not blinded, concealment not described | Elective cardiac | PiCCO Plus monitor: ITBVI 850 to 1,000 mL/m, ScvO2 > 60% | Fluids and inotropes | |
Valentine et al. 1998 [41], USA | - | Randomisation not clear, not blinded | Elective aortic | PAC: CI ≥ 2.8 L/minute/m2, 8 ≤ PCWP ≤ 15 mmHg, SVR ≤ 1,100 dyn/second/cm5 | Fluids and inotropes | |
Van der Linden et al. 2010 [42], Europe | ++ | High risk | Vascular | Vigileo monitor/FloTrac sensor: CI > 2.5 L/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes | |
Velmahos et al. 2000 [43], USA | + | Not blinded | High risk | Emergent trauma | Thoracic bioimpedance: CI > 4.5 L/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes |
Venn et al. 2002 [44], Europe | ++ | High risk | Orthopaedic | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation with FTc > 0.4 seconds | Fluids | |
Wakeling et al. 2005 [45], Europe | ++ | Elective major bowel | Oesophageal Doppler: SV optimisation and rise in CVP < 3 mmHg | Fluids | ||
Wilson et al. 1999 [46], Europe | + | Not blinded | High risk | Elective major (abdominal, vascular, urologic) | PAC: DO2 > 600 mL/minute/m2 | Fluids and inotropes |
Summary measures and planned method of analysis
Results
Study selection
Study characteristics
Quantitative data synthesis
SSIs
Pneumonia
CRBSIs
UTIs
Analysis | Number of studies | References | Treatment group (episodes/total patients) | Control group (episodes/total patients) | OR (95% CI) | Pvalue |
I
2
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SSI high-risk patients | 13 | 109/1,483 | 177/1,522 | 0.48 (0.33 to 0.70) | 0.0001 | 21% | |
SSI studies providing definitions consistent with CDC criteria | 8 | 32/362 | 74/390 | 0.37 (0.23 to 0.58) | 0.0001 | 0% | |
Pneumonia high-risk patients | 12 | 115/1,444 | 155/1,428 | 0.70 (0.54 to 0.91) | 0.008 | 0% | |
Pneumonia studies providing definitions consistent with CDC criteria | 9 | 99/1,289 | 141/1,341 | 0.70 (0.53 to 0.93) | 0.01 | 0% | |
UTI high-risk patients | 10 | 13/458 | 31/449 | 0.44 (0.22 to 0.88) | 0.02 | 1% | |
UTI studies providing definitions consistent with CDC criteria | 7 | 9/298 | 24/326 | 0.45 (0.20 to 0.99) | 0.05 | 0% |
All infectious episodes
Discussion
Limitations
Research agenda
Conclusions
Key messages
-
In surgical patients, a flow-directed haemodynamic therapy aimed to optimise DO2 could be a useful strategy to prevent hospital-acquired infections.
-
Specifically, goal-directed haemodynamic therapy significantly decreases the rate of surgical site infections, pneumonia and urinary tract infections.
-
Thus, this strategy must be strongly encouraged, particularly in the setting of surgical patients at high risk for infections.
-
Continuing investigations into this area are warranted to better clarify the link between haemodynamic optimisation and improved outcome in surgical patients.