ArticleCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie2009
Substantial variation of both opinions and practice regarding perioperative fluid resuscitation.
Article in Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Restrictive Perioperative Fluid Management in Pancreaticoduodenectomy.World journal of surgery · 2018Pooled it
- Review
- Reduction in Cardiac Arrhythmias Within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program in Colorectal Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- PERioperative Fluid Management in Elective ColecTomy (PERFECT)-a national prospective cohort study.Irish journal of medical science · 2019Article
- Application of standardized hemodynamic protocols within enhanced recovery after surgery programs to improve outcomes associated with anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Review
- Learning to prescribe intravenous fluids: A scoping review.Perspectives on medical education · 2017Article
- Population-based Assessment of Intraoperative Fluid Administration Practices Across Three Surgical Specialties.Annals of surgery · 2017Article
- Intravenous Fluid Therapy in Traumatic Brain Injury and Decompressive Craniectomy.Bulletin of emergency and trauma · 2014Review
- Fluid therapy in neurotrauma: basic and clinical concepts.Reviews in health care · 2014Article
- Fluid balance and acute kidney injury.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are no current standards of care guiding perioperative fluid administration, and clinicians continue to debate restrictive versus liberal fluid administration. We sought to simultaneously evaluate the opinions and practice of surgeons, intensivists and anesthesiologists in a single centre regarding perioperative fluid resuscitation.
methodsA postal survey sent to surgeons, intensivists and anesthesiologists in a single academic health care centre presented case-based scenarios followed by questions on fluid requirements and 5-point Likert scales involving statements about resuscitation. We performed a retrospective chart review to evaluate amount and type of intra-and postoperative (72-h) fluid administration, urine output and postoperative ventilation time in patients undergoing uncomplicated esophagectomy or pneumonectomy.
resultsSeventy-four of 77 respondents (96%) agreed that precise fluid resuscitation diminishes the risk of adverse events. Surgeons overall gave less fluids than anesthesiologists or intensivists and used fewer resuscitation end points to estimate fluid requirements perioperatively. For right hemicolectomies, only 3% of surgeons chose a fluid rate greater than 150 mL/h, compared with 55% of intensivists. We reviewed 49 patients' charts (25 who had pneumonectomies, 24 who had esophagectomies) retrospectively. The coefficient of variation (COV = standard deviation divided by its mean) of fluid administration intraoperatively was 0.56 for pneumonectomy and 0.35 for esophagectomy; postoperatively, the COV was greater than 0.50 for the first 24 hours, but less than 0.50 after 24 hours postoperatively.
conclusionThe presence of substantial variability of both opinion and practice of perioperative fluid resuscitation in a single centre supports the need for further research to identify objective methods to define perioperative fluid requirements and standards of perioperative resuscitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19503665PMC2689725W173409294What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.