ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2015
Variation in haemodynamic monitoring for major surgery in European nations: secondary analysis of the EuSOS dataset.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01203605 (European Surgical Outcomes Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers.
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.
European Surgical Outcomes Study: A Multi-centre, International Seven Day Evaluation of Patient Care and Clinical Outcomes for Patients Undergoing Non-cardiac Surgery
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- HIgh versus STAndard blood Pressure target in hypertensive high-risk patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery: the HISTAP multicenter randomized clinical trial.Intensive care medicine · 2026Trial
- Cardiac output-guided haemodynamic therapy for patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery: OPTIMISE II randomised clinical trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Trial
- Hypotension Prediction Index based protocolized haemodynamic management reduces the incidence and duration of intraoperative hypotension in primary total hip arthroplasty: a single centre feasibility randomised blinded prospective interventional trial.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Physiology, monitoring, and optimisation of perioperative tissue oxygenation: a narrative review.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Review
- Access to haemodynamic evaluation tools in middle-income countries: a survey of 1593 anaesthetists and intensivists from 39 nations.BJA open · 2026Article
- Haemodynamic monitoring and management during non-cardiac surgery: a survey among German anaesthesiologists.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
- Current practices in hemodynamic monitoring and management during non-cardiac surgery in Austria.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- AI for the hemodynamic assessment of critically ill and surgical patients: focus on clinical applications.Annals of intensive care · 2025Review
- Development of the Korean Quality Improvement Platform in Surgery (K-QIPS) program: a nationwide project to improve surgical quality and patient safety.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2024Article
- Haemodynamic monitoring during noncardiac surgery: past, present, and future.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2024Review
- Pressure response to fluid challenge administration in hypotensive surgical patients: a post-hoc pharmacodynamic analysis of five datasets.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023Article
- The effect of compliance with a perioperative goal-directed therapy protocol on outcomes after high-risk surgery: a before-after study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2021Article
- Perioperative hemodynamic optimization: from guidelines to implementation-an experts' opinion paper.Annals of intensive care · 2021Review
- Four different methods of measuring cardiac index during cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2021Article
- Shedding light on perioperative hemodynamic monitoring.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020Article
- Management of perioperative volume therapy - monitoring and pitfalls.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2020Review
- Clinical practice in intraoperative haemodynamic monitoring in Poland: a point prevalence study in 31 Polish hospitals.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2020Article
- Evaluation of least significant changes of pulse contour analysis-derived parameters.Annals of intensive care · 2019Article
- The '5 Ts' of perioperative goal-directed haemodynamic therapy.British journal of anaesthesia · 2019Article
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 8 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of cardiac output monitoring may improve patient outcomes after major surgery. However, little is known about the use of this technology across nations.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a previously published observational study. Patients aged 16 years and over undergoing major non-cardiac surgery in a 7-day period in April 2011 were included into this analysis. The objective is to describe prevalence and type of cardiac output monitoring used in major surgery in Europe.
resultsIncluded in the analysis were 12,170 patients from the surgical services of 426 hospitals in 28 European nations. One thousand four hundred and sixteen patients (11.6 %) were exposed to cardiac output monitoring, and 2343 patients (19.3 %) received a central venous catheter. Patients with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores were more frequently exposed to cardiac output monitoring (ASA I and II, 643 patients [8.6 %]; ASA III-V, 768 patients [16.2 %]; p < 0.01) and central venous catheter (ASA I and II, 874 patients [11.8 %]; ASA III-V, 1463 patients [30.9 %]; p < 0.01). In elective surgery, 990 patients (10.8 %) were exposed to cardiac output monitoring, in urgent surgery 252 patients (11.7 %) and in emergency surgery 173 patients (19.8 %). A central venous catheter was used in 1514 patients (16.6 %) undergoing elective, in 480 patients (22.2 %) undergoing urgent and in 349 patients (39.9 %) undergoing emergency surgery. Nine hundred sixty patients (7.9 %) were monitored using arterial waveform analysis, 238 patients (2.0 %) using oesophageal Doppler ultrasound, 55 patients (0.5 %) using a pulmonary artery catheter and 44 patients (2.0 %) using other technologies. Across nations, cardiac output monitoring use varied from 0.0 % (0/249 patients) to 27.5 % (19/69 patients), whilst central venous catheter use varied from 5.6 % (7/125 patients) to 43.2 % (16/37 patients).
conclusionsOne in ten patients undergoing major surgery is exposed to cardiac output monitoring whilst one in five receives a central venous catheter. The use of both technologies varies widely across Europe.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01203605. Date of registration: 15.09.2010.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.