Why the study?
Does pre-operative i.v. fluid loading with crystalloid solutions improve intraoperative cardiac preload in patients undergoing elective oesophagectomies?
Does pre-operative i.v. fluid loading with crystalloid solutions improve intraoperative cardiac preload in patients undergoing elective oesophagectomies?
Pre-operative i.v. fluid loading with crystalloid solutions does not improve intraoperative volume status or cardiac function in patients undergoing oesophageal resection.
Preoperative crystalloid loading was not associated with higher post-induction ITBVI in this cohort; should not change practice and leaves open efficacy in RCTs.
BACKGROUND: Perioperative fluid therapy is controversially debated in surgery. In malnourished and hypovolaemic patients, a restrictive fluid regimen may lead to hypoperfusion and increased incidence of complications. The present prospective cohort study was performed to assess whether pre-operative i.v. fluid administration improves intraoperative cardiac preload in patients undergoing oesophageal resection. METHODS: Intraoperatively, the intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI) was monitored in 44 consecutive patients undergoing elective oesophagectomies with the transthoracic thermodilution technique. Twenty-two of these patients received a pre-operative i.v. fluid loading with a balanced crystalloid solution (1 ml/kg/h over 48 h). RESULTS: After induction of anaesthesia ITBVI was low but not different between the groups [767 (512-1314) vs. 775 (531-1200) ml/m(2), P=0.81]. In the intervention group, the extravascular lung water increased above normal levels during the operation. The groups did not differ in cardiac output, blood pressure, heart rate and central venous pressure. Post-operative morbidity was not different between the cohorts. CONCLUSION: Pre-operative i.v. fluid loading with crystalloid solutions could not be shown to improve the intraoperative volume status and cardiac function in this study. Randomised trials with other volume replacement techniques are recommended.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raué et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: