ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Systematic review and meta-analysis of goal-directed haemodynamic therapy algorithms during surgery for the prevention of surgical site infection.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes associated with incisional and organ/space surgical site infections in abdominal surgery patients.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Current practices in hemodynamic monitoring and management during non-cardiac surgery in Austria.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Interpreting statistical evidence with S values: an illustration with trials of goal-directed haemodynamic therapy.Anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Association of fluid management during robotic-assisted radical laparoscopic prostatectomy with early surgical clinical outcomes: a risk factor for lymphoceles.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Response to comment about article 'Systematic review and meta-analysis of goal-directed haemodynamic therapy algorithms during surgery for the prevention of surgical site infection'.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Correspondence regarding 'Systematic review and meta-analysis of goal-directed haemodynamic therapy algorithms during surgery for the prevention of surgical site infection'.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- ERAS-guided matrix nursing pathway targeting risk factors in spine surgery: development and prospective evaluation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication. Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy (GDHT) may help to prevent SSI, but recommendations for its use initially have been set at conditional because of low-certainty evidence at the time. An updated systematic review with SSI as the primary endpoint has not been performed since 2011, and important new evidence has emerged. We assessed the influence of GDHT on SSI and other postoperative outcomes. Methods: We searched Ovid/MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase.com), and Cochrane library from inception up to September 2024 for randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of any GDHT algorithm to conventional fluid therapy on SSI incidence in adult patients undergoing surgery and analysed eligible data using random effects. We conducted several subgroup analyses, including the risk of bias (RoB), and a trial sequential analysis (TSA). We evaluated the certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022277535. Findings: We found 75 studies that met the inclusion criteria with an incidence of 1,478 SSI among 13,010 patients (11.4%). The incidence of SSI was reduced from 13.3% in the conventional fluid therapy to 9.4% after GDHT (absolute risk reduction 3.9%); pooled relative risk 0.71 (95% CI 0.62-0.81). Subgroup analysis for the low RoB studies revealed comparable results. Meta-regression indicated no strong evidence for individual subgroup effects. In the TSA, the cumulative z-line crossed the boundary for effect. Interpretation: High-certainty evidence indicates that GDHT reduces the risk of SSI when compared to conventional fluid therapy in adults undergoing surgery. New studies are unlikely to change this outcome. These findings justify a stronger recommendation for the use of GDHT. Funding: Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.
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.