Key result
Minimally invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring techniques enable individualized perioperative fluid management, potentially reducing adverse complications and improving patient outcomes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Minimally invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring devices enable personalized, goal-directed perioperative fluid management, potentially reducing adverse complications.
An increasing number of patients require precise intraoperative hemodynamic monitoring due to aging and comorbidities. To prevent undesirable outcomes from intraoperative hypotension or hypoperfusion, appropriate threshold settings are required. These setting can vary widely from patient to patient. Goal-directed therapy techniques allow for flow monitoring as the standard for perioperative fluid management. Based on the concept of personalized medicine, individual assessment and treatment are more advantageous than conventional or uniform interventions. The recent development of minimally and noninvasive monitoring devices make it possible to apply detailed control, tracking, and observation of broad patient populations, all while reducing adverse complications. In this manuscript, we review the monitoring features of each device, together with possible advantages and disadvantages of their use in optimizing patient hemodynamic management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yamada et al. (2018) conducted a review in Perioperative hemodynamic instability. Minimally invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring vs. Conventional or invasive monitoring was evaluated. Minimally invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring techniques enable individualized perioperative fluid management, potentially reducing adverse complications and improving patient outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: