Key result
A perioperative hemodynamic protocol guided by noninvasive cardiac output monitoring did not reduce overall complications (40% vs 41%; RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.67-1.44; P=0.397) in major abdominal surgery.
Why the study?
Does a perioperative hemodynamic protocol based on noninvasive cardiac output monitoring decrease postoperative complications and hospital length of stay in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery?
Population
142 adult patients scheduled for open colorectal surgery, gastrectomy, or small bowel resection requiring…
Comparison
Perioperative hemodynamic protocol including… vs Standard practice
Design
RCT, Randomized, Surgeon blinded to the study (for hospital discharge)
Follow-up
Until hospital discharge or death
Authors
Loading...
May reduce postoperative complications in abdominal surgery patients; leaves open need for confirmatory RCTs before routine adoption.
RCT (n=142)
Outcome assessor blinded
Yes
Does a perioperative hemodynamic protocol based on noninvasive cardiac output monitoring decrease postoperative complications and hospital length of stay in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery?
Relative Risk: 0.99 (95% CI 0.67–1.44)
Absolute Event Rate: 40% vs 41%
p-value: p=0.397
A perioperative hemodynamic protocol guided by noninvasive cardiac output monitoring did not reduce overall complications or length of stay in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.
Pestaña et al. (2014) conducted an RCT in Major abdominal surgery requiring ICU admission (n=142). Perioperative hemodynamic protocol based on noninvasive cardiac output monitoring vs. Standard practice was evaluated on Overall complications (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.44, p=0.397). A perioperative hemodynamic protocol guided by noninvasive cardiac output monitoring did not reduce overall complications (40% vs 41%; RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.67-1.44; P=0.397) in major abdominal surgery.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: