Trial reportMedicine2015
Hemodynamic Consequences of Malignant Ascites in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Surgery*: A Prospective Substudy of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02742428 (Preoperative Slow Ascites Drainage Versus Standard Care for Patients With Proven or Suspected Advanced Ovarian Cancer - a Hemodynamic Impact on Systemic Circulation, Patient's Nutritional Status and Quality of Life), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
Preoperative Slow Ascites Drainage Versus Standard Care for Patients With Proven or Suspected Advanced Ovarian Cancer - a Hemodynamic Impact on Systemic Circulation, Patient's Nutritional Status and Quality of Life: a Randomized Trial.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Perioperative goal-directed fluid management using noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring in gynecologic oncology.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Trial
- Postoperative Weight Gain, Due to Fluid Retention After Ovarian Cancer Surgery-How Much Is too Much?Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Spatio-temporal kinetics of patients' CAR-T cells in blood and serous cavity effusion: real-world clinical insights.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Prospective Assessment of Clinically Relevant Fluid Balance Thresholds Associated With Postoperative Complications in Advanced Ovarian Cancer.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Observational
- Intraoperative Fluid Balance and Perioperative Complications in Ovarian Cancer Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- New Insights into the Assessment of Peri-Operative Risk in Women Undergoing Surgery for Gynecological Neoplasms: A Call for a New Tool.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Explaining the Elusive Nature of a Well-Defined Threshold for Blood Transfusion in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- When we open and close: Postoperative outcomes after aborted primary cytoreduction for ovarian cancer.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2022Article
- ECOG and BMI as preoperative risk factors for severe postoperative complications in ovarian cancer patients: results of a prospective study (RISC-GYN-trial).Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2021Article
- The need for post-operative vasopressor infusions after major gynae-oncologic surgery within an ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) pathway.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malignant ascites (MA) is most commonly observed in patients scheduled for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) surgery and is supposed as a major risk factor promoting perioperative hemodynamic deterioration. We aimed to assess the hemodynamic consequences of MA on systemic circulation in patients undergoing cytoreductive EOC surgery.This study is a predefined post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled pilot trial comparing intravenous solutions within a goal-directed algorithm to optimize hemodynamic therapy in patients undergoing cytoreductive EOC surgery. Ascites was used to stratify the EOC patients prior to randomization in the main study. We analyzed 2 groups according to the amount of ascites (NLAS: none or low ascites [<500 mL] vs HAS: high ascites group [>500 mL]). Differences in hemodynamic variables with respect to time were analyzed using nonparametric analysis for longitudinal data and multivariate generalized estimating equation adjusting the analysis for the randomized study groups of the main study.A total of 31 patients in the NLAS and 16 patients in the HAS group were analyzed. Although cardiac output was not different between groups suggesting a similar circulatory blood flow, the HAS group revealed higher heart rates and lower stroke volumes during surgery. There were no differences in pressure-based hemodynamic variables. In the HAS group, fluid demands, reflected by the time to reindication of a fluid challenge after preload optimization, increased steadily, whereas stroke volume could not be maintained at baseline resulting in hemodynamic instability after 1.5 h of surgery. In contrast, in the NLAS group fluid demands were stable and stroke volume could be maintained during surgery. Clinically relevant associations of the type of fluid replacement with hemodynamic consequences were particularly observed in the HAS group, in which transfusion of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) was associated to an improved circulatory flow and reduced vasopressor and fluid demands, whereas the administration of artificial infusion solutions was related to opposite effects.Malignant ascites >500 mL implies increased fluid demands and substantial alterations in circulatory blood flow during cancer surgery. Fresh frozen plasma transfusion promotes recovering hemodynamic stability in patients with malignant ascites >500 mL, in whom artificial infusion solutions could not prevent from hemodynamic deterioration.
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.