Key result
Hemodynamic optimization reduced overall mortality (RR 0.75) compared to standard care, an effect primarily driven by peri-operative interventions in high-risk surgical patients.
Why the study?
Does hemodynamic optimization reduce mortality in adult intensive care and surgical patients?
Population
30 RCTs pooling 5,733 adult patients in intensive care unit or surgical populations, including 4,174…
Comparison
Hemodynamic optimization using fluid and/or… vs Standard care without deliberate hemodynamic…
Design
Meta-analysis
Follow-up
up to 28 or 30 days
Authors
Loading...
Supports hemodynamic optimization in high-risk surgery; extends RCT evidence while confirming no benefit in sepsis.
Meta-Analysis (n=5,733)
Does hemodynamic optimization reduce mortality in adult intensive care and surgical patients?
Relative Risk: 0.75 (95% CI 0.62–0.9)
Absolute Risk Reduction: 0.4%
Hemodynamic optimization using fluids and vasoactive agents significantly reduces mortality in high-risk peri-operative and trauma patients, but offers no survival benefit for patients with sepsis and organ failure.
Poeze et al. (2005) conducted a meta-analysis in Critical illness (peri-operative, trauma, sepsis, organ failure) (n=5,733). Hemodynamic optimization vs. Standard care was evaluated on Overall mortality at 28 to 30 days (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.90). Hemodynamic optimization reduced overall mortality (RR 0.75) compared to standard care, an effect primarily driven by peri-operative interventions in high-risk surgical patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: