ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2022
A retrospective study from a single center of 252 patients who underwent elective pancreaticoduodenectomy to compare perioperative hemodynamic optimization therapy and usual protocols in terms of perioperative cardiac function.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perioperative hemodynamic optimization therapy is used to improve cardiac function to meet the increased demand during the perioperative period and to reduce hypervolemia or hypovolemia, tissue hypoperfusion and other postoperative complications. The present single center retrospective study aimed to compare perioperative hemodynamic optimization therapy and usual protocols in terms of perioperative cardiac function in 252 patients who underwent elective pancreaticoduodenectomy. Patients underwent elective pancreaticoduodenectomy under usual protocols of enhanced recovery after surgery procedures without intraoperative fluid optimization (UC; n=142) or with intraoperative fluid optimization (FO; n=110). For intraoperative fluid and vasoactive medication optimization, the patients of the UG cohort underwent usual cardiovascular monitoring and in the FO cohort, fluid interventions were given if stroke volume variations were >20% during and at the end of surgeries. The length of the hospital stay (discharge from operation theater to discharge from the ward) of the FO cohort was shorter than that of the UC cohort (11.02±2.07 days vs. 14.95±3.97 days; P<0.0001). The fluid balance (total input fluid-total output fluid) was higher in the UC cohort than that in the FO cohort (6,101±695 ml vs. 4,623±358 ml; P<0.0001). The number of patients that required intraoperatively metaraminol was greater in the UC cohort than in the FO cohort (P<0.0001). The number of patients that required intraoperatively noradrenaline (P<0.0001) and dopamine/dobutamine (P<0.0001) administration was greater in the FO cohort than those in the UC cohort. A greater number of patients in the UC cohort suffered from pancreatic fistula, arrhythmia, postoperative delirium, electrolyte disturbances, hyponatremia, refractory analgesia and required intraoperative blood products (P<0.05 vs. FO cohort). Pancreaticoduodenectomy under usual protocol with intraoperative fluid optimization may have perioperative and postoperative benefits (level of evidence, 3; technical efficacy stage, 1).
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.