Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28086855›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2017

Postoperative fluid overload is a risk factor for adverse surgical outcome in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a retrospective study in 335 patients.

Torben Glatz, Birte Kulemann, Goran Marjanovic, Svenja Bregenzer, Frank Makowiec, Jens Hoeppner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Torben GlatzDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany. Torben.Glatz@uniklinik-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3404-2711
Birte KulemannDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Goran MarjanovicDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Svenja BregenzerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Frank MakowiecDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Jens HoeppnerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg and Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany.
University of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRestrictive intraoperative fluid management is increasingly recommended for patients undergoing esophagectomy. Controversy still exists about the impact of postoperative fluid management on perioperative outcome.

methodsWe retrospectively examined 335 patients who had undergone esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at the University Hospital Freiburg between 1996 and 2014 to investigate the relation between intra- and postoperative fluid management and postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy.

resultsPerioperative morbidity was 75%, the in-hospital mortality 8%. A fluid balance above average on the operation day was strongly associated with a higher rate of postoperative mortality (21% vs 3%, p < 0.001) and morbidity (83% vs 66%, p = 0.001). Univariate analysis for risk factors for adverse surgical outcome (Clavien ≥ III) identified ASA-score (p = 0.002), smoking (p = 0.036), reconstruction by colonic interposition (p = 0.036), cervical anastomosis (p = 0.017), blood transfusion (p = 0.038) and total fluid balance on the operation day and on POD 4 (p = 0.001) as risk factors. Multivariate analysis confirmed only ASA-score (p = 0.001) and total fluid balance (p = 0.001) as independent predictors of adverse surgical outcome.

conclusionIntra- and postoperative fluid overload is strongly associated with increased postoperative morbidity. Our results suggest restrictive intra- and especially postoperative fluid management to optimize the outcome after esophagectomy.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyFemaleHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PeriodRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsAdverse surgical outcomeEsophageal cancerEsophagectomyMorbidityPerioperative fluid management

Identifiers

PMID28086855
PMCPMC5237209
OpenAlexW2576330848

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.