Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Anestesiologica > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Anestesiologica 2016 Apr 13

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEMINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA

A Journal on Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, Analgesia and Intensive Care

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,036

Frequency: Monthly

ISSN 0375-9393

Online ISSN 1827-1596

 

Minerva Anestesiologica 2016 Apr 13

Perioperative haemodynamic goal-directed therapy and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression

Mariateresa GIGLIO 1, Fabio MANCA 2, Lidia DALFINO 1, Nicola BRIENZA 1

1 Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Policlinico, Bari, Italy; 2 Department of Education, Psychology, Comunication Studies, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

BACKGROUND: Recent data found that perioperative goal directed therapy (GDT) was effective only in higher control mortality rate (>20%) with a relatively high heterogeneity that limited the strength of evidence. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to clearly understand which high risk patients may benefit of GDT.
METHODS: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analyses, including a meta-regression technique. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library databases were searched (1980-January 2015). Trials enrolling adult surgical patients and comparing the effects of GDT versus standard haemodynamic therapy were considered. The primary outcome measure was mortality. Data synthesis was obtained by using Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) by random- effects model.
RESULTS: 58 studies met the inclusion criteria (8171 participants). Pooled OR for mortality was 0.70 ( 95% CI 0.56-0.88, p=0.002, no statistical heterogeneity ). GDT significantly reduced mortality when it is >10% in control group (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61, p<0.00001). The meta-regression model showed that the cut off of 10% of mortality rate in control group significantly differentiates 43 studies from the other 15, with a regression coefficient b of-0.033 and a p-value of 0.0001. The significant effect of GDT was driven by high risk of bias studies (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34-0.67, p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis, adopting the meta-regression technique, suggests that GDT significantly reduces mortality even when the event control rate is >10%.

language: English


FULL TEXT  SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL  REPRINTS

top of page