Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26471495›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2015

Fluid management guided by a continuous non-invasive arterial pressure device is associated with decreased postoperative morbidity after total knee and hip replacement.

Jan Benes, Lenka Haidingerova, Jiri Pouska, Jan Stepanik, Alena Stenglova, Jan Zatloukal, Richard Pradl, Ivan Chytra, Eduard Kasal

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Enhanced recovery pathways in orthopedic surgery.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology · 2019
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jan BenesDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic. benesj@fnplzen.cz.
Lenka HaidingerovaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Jiri PouskaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Jan StepanikDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Alena StenglovaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Jan ZatloukalDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Richard PradlDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Ivan ChytraDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.
Eduard KasalDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Teaching Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Plzen, Charles University Prague, alej Svobody 80, 306 40, Plzen, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of goal directed fluid protocols in intermediate risk patients undergoing hip or knee replacement was studied in few trials using invasive monitoring. For this reason we have implemented two different fluid management protocols, both based on a novel totally non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring device and compared them to the standard (no-protocol) treatment applied before the transition in our academic institution.

methodsThree treatment groups were compared in this prospective study: the observational (CONTROL, N = 40) group before adoption of fluid protocols and two randomized groups after the transition to protocol fluid management with the use of the continuous non-invasive blood pressure monitoring (CNAP®) device. In the PRESSURE group (N = 40) standard variables were used for restrictive fluid therapy. Goal directed fluid therapy using pulse pressure variation was used in the GDFT arm (N = 40). The influence on the rate of postoperative complications, on the hospital length of stay and other parameters was assessed.

resultsBoth protocols were associated with decreased fluid administration and maintained hemodynamic stability. Reduced rate of postoperative infection and organ complications (22 (55 %) vs. 33 (83 %) patients; p = 0.016; relative risk 0.67 (0.49-0.91)) was observed in the GDFT group compared to CONTROL. Lower number of patients receiving transfusion (4 (10 %) in GDFT vs. 17 (43 %) in CONTROL; p = 0.005) might contribute to this observation. No significant differences were observed in other end-points.

conclusionIn our study, the use of the fluid protocol based on pulse pressure variation assessed using continuous non-invasive arterial pressure measurement seems to be associated with a reduction in postoperative complications and transfusion needs as compared to standard no-protocol treatment.

trial registrationACTRN12612001014842.

Indexed as

Arterial PressureArthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFluid TherapyMonitoring, IntraoperativePostoperative ComplicationsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID26471495
PMCPMC4608292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.