Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38942901›Full record

ArticleDie Anaesthesiologie2024

Dynamic parameters of fluid responsiveness in the operating room : An analysis of intraoperative ventilation framework conditions.

M Prütz, A Bozkurt, B Löser, S A Haas, D Tschopp, P Rieder, S Trachsel, G Vorderwülbecke, M Menk, F Balzer and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Die Anaesthesiologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

13 authors.

M PrützDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany. maria.pruetz@med.uni-rostock.de.
A BozkurtDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
B LöserDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
S A HaasDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
D TschoppThe Hirslanden Clinical Trial Unit, Hirslanden AG, Glattpark, Switzerland.
P RiederThe Hirslanden Clinical Trial Unit, Hirslanden AG, Glattpark, Switzerland.
S TrachselInstitute for Anaesthetics and Intensive Care, Klinik Beau-Site, Hirslanden AG, Bern, Switzerland.
G VorderwülbeckeDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
M MenkDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus and Carl Gustav Carus Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
F BalzerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
S TreskatschDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
D A ReuterDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
A ZitzmannDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Medical Centre Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReliable assessment of fluid responsiveness with pulse pressure variation (PPV) depends on certain ventilation-related preconditions; however, some of these requirements are in contrast with recommendations for protective ventilation.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the applicability of PPV in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery by retrospectively analyzing intraoperative ventilation data. MATERIAL AND

methodsIntraoperative ventilation data from three large medical centers in Germany and Switzerland from January to December 2018 were extracted from electronic patient records and pseudonymized; 10,334 complete data sets were analyzed with respect to the ventilation parameters set as well as demographic and medical data.

resultsIn 6.3% of the 3398 included anesthesia records, patients were ventilated with mean tidal volumes (mTV) > 8 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW). These would qualify for PPV-based hemodynamic assessment, but the majority were ventilated with lower mTVs. In patients who underwent abdominal surgery (75.5% of analyzed cases), mTVs > 8 ml/kg PBW were used in 5.5% of cases, which did not differ between laparoscopic (44.9%) and open (55.1%) approaches. Other obstacles to the use of PPV, such as elevated positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or increased respiratory rate, were also identified. Of all the cases 6.0% were ventilated with a mTV of > 8 ml/kg PBW and a PEEP of 5-10 cmH

conclusionThe data suggest that only few patients meet the currently defined TV (of > 8 ml/kg PBW) for assessment of fluid responsiveness using PPV during surgery.

Indexed as

Fluid TherapyOperating RoomsRespiration, ArtificialTidal VolumeAdultAgedBlood PressureFemaleGermanyHumansIntraoperative CareMaleMiddle AgedPositive-Pressure RespirationRetrospective StudiesSwitzerlandFluid therapyGeneral anesthesiaIntraoperative monitoringPulse pressureRetrospective study

Identifiers

PMID38942901
PMCPMC11222210

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.