Home > Riviste > Minerva Anestesiologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Anestesiologica 2017 October;83(10) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2017 October;83(10):1051-60

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Estratti
Per citare questo articolo

MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA

Rivista di Anestesia, Rianimazione, Terapia Antalgica e Terapia Intensiva


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 2,623


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE  


Minerva Anestesiologica 2017 October;83(10):1051-60

DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11824-9

Copyright © 2017 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Comparison of absolute fluid restriction versus relative volume redistribution strategy in low central venous pressure anesthesia in liver resection surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Jan ZATLOUKAL 1 , Richard PRADL 1, Jakub KLETECKA 1, Tomas SKALICKY 2, Vaclav LISKA 2, 3, Jan BENES 1, 3

1 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Pilsen University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, Pilsen, Czech Republic; 2 Department of Surgery, Pilsen University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, Pilsen, Czech Republic; 3 Faculty of Medicine, Biomedical Center, Charles University Prague, Pilsen, Czech Republic


PDF  


BACKGROUNDː Lowering central venous pressure (CVP) can decrease blood loss during liver resection and it is associated with improved outcomes. Multiple CVP reducing maneuvers have been described, but direct comparison of their effectiveness and safety has never been performed.
METHODSː Patients undergoing resections of two or more liver segments were equally randomized to absolute fluid restriction (AR, N.=17) or relative volume redistribution group (RR, N.=17). The ease of reaching low CVP, blood loss, morbidity and mortality were assessed. Besides, the effect of Pringle maneuver and utility of stroke volume variation (SVV) were analyzed.
RESULTSː Both methods of CVP reduction were equally effective (0.7±0.9 vs. 0.9±1.0 protocolized steps in the AR and RR group; P=0.356) and safe (no difference in observed blood loss, intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, lactate levels, morbidity and mortality). Patients in the AR group received smaller amount of fluids in the pre-resection period (120 (100-150) vs. 600 (500-700) mL; P<0.001), and had slightly longer hospital stay (10 [8-14] vs. 8 [7-11]; P=0.045). Low CVP was predicted by SVV>10% with 81.4% sensitivity and 77.1% specificity. Reduced blood loss and transfusion rate was observed when Pringle maneuver was used.
CONCLUSIONSː In our study, absolute fluid restriction and relative volume redistribution seemed to be equally effective and safe methods of lowering CVP in patients undergoing liver resection. According to our data high SVV might be considered as a low CVP replacement. Pringle maneuver reduced blood loss and transfusion requirement.


KEY WORDS: Hepatectomy - Central venous pressure - Hemodynamics - Fluid therapy

inizio pagina

Publication History

Issue published online: October 5, 2017
Article first published online: April 19, 2017
Manuscript accepted: April 13, 2017
Manuscript revised: March 24, 2017
Manuscript received: November 22, 2016

Per citare questo articolo

Zatloukal J, Pradl R, Kletecka J, Skalicky T, Liska V, Benes J. Comparison of absolute fluid restriction versus relative volume redistribution strategy in low central venous pressure anesthesia in liver resection surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Minerva Anestesiol 2017;83:1051-60. DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11824-9

Corresponding author e-mail

zatloukalj@fnplzen.cz