• Anaesthesiology
• Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy
• Meta-analysis
• Surgery
• Surgical site infection
• Systematic review
• Wound infection

• Complicaciones postoperatorias/epidemiología
• Fluid therapy/methods*
• Fluid therapy/statistics & numerical data
• Fluidoterapia/estadística y datos numéricos
• Fluidoterapia/métodos*
• Hemodinámica/fisiología
• Hemodynamics/physiology
• Postoperative complications/epidemiology

• Humans
• Fluid Therapy/methods
• Stroke Volume
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
• Intraoperative Care/methods
• Hemodynamics
• Postoperative Complications/prevention & control
• Postoperative Complications/epidemiology
• Acute Kidney Injury/prevention & control
• Acute Kidney Injury/etiology
• Abdomen/surgery
• Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data
• Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives/administration & dosage
• Elective Surgical Procedures

• dynamic parameter
• fluid resuscitation
• mortality
• norepinephrine
• sepsis
• shock duration
• static parameter
• ultrasound

• Humans
• Fluid Therapy/methods
• Male
• Female
• Sepsis/therapy
• Sepsis/mortality
• Middle Aged
• Resuscitation/methods
• Aged
• Central Venous Pressure
• Single-Blind Method
• Vena Cava, Inferior

• goals
• monitoring, intraoperative
• length of stay
• heart failure
• treatment outcome
• intensive care units

• Humans
• Length of Stay
• Postoperative Complications/epidemiology
• Postoperative Complications/prevention & control
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
• Intensive Care Units
• Respiration, Artificial
• Early Goal-Directed Therapy/methods
• Monitoring, Physiologic/instrumentation
• Monitoring, Physiologic/methods

• continuous cardiac output monitoring
• general anaesthesia
• goal-directed fluid therapy
• intraoperative fluid therapy
• network meta-analysis
• perioperative fluid management
• systematic literature review

• fluid
• general anaesthesia
• goal-directed haemodynamic therapy
• haemodynamics
• perioperative care
• postoperative complications
• stroke volume

• Anesthesia, General/mortality
• General Surgery/methods
• Hemodynamics/physiology
• Humans
• Postoperative Complications/mortality
• Postoperative Complications/prevention & control

• Cardiac output
• Fluid therapy
• Meta-analysis
• Postoperative complications

Stroke volume variation (SVV) has been used to predict fluid responsiveness; however, it remains unclear whether goal-directed fluid therapy using SVV contributes to bowel function recovery in abdominal surgery. This prospective randomized controlled trial aimed to compare bowel movement recovery in patients undergoing colon resection surgery between groups using traditional or SVV-based methods for intravenous fluid management. We collected data between March 2015 and July 2017. Bowel function recovery was analyzed based on the gas-passing time, sips of water time, and soft diet (SD) time. Finally, we analyzed data from 60 patients. There was no significant between-group difference in the patients’ characteristics. Compared with the control group (n = 30), the SVV group (n = 30) had a significantly higher colloid volume and lower crystalloid volume. Moreover, the gas-passing time (77.8 vs. 85.3 h, p = 0.034) and SD time (67.6 vs. 85.1 h, p < 0.001) were significantly faster in the SVV group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, the SVV group showed significantly lower scores of pain on a numeric rating scale and morphine equivalent doses during post-anesthetic care, at 24 postoperative hours, and at 48 postoperative hours. Our findings suggested that, compared with the control group, the SVV group showed a faster postoperative SD time, reduced acute postoperative pain intensity, and lower rescue analgesics. Therefore, SVV-based optimal fluid management is expected to potentially contribute to postoperative bowel function recovery in patients undergoing colon resection surgery.

• bowel movement
• colon cancer surgery
• goal-directed fluid therapy
• recovery
• stroke volume variation

Perioperative goal-directed haemodynamic therapy (GDHT), defined as the administration of fluids with or without inotropes or vasoactive agents against explicit measured goals to augment blood flow, has been evaluated in many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) over the past four decades. Reported post-operative pulmonary complications commonly include chest infection or pneumonia, atelectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury, aspiration pneumonitis, pulmonary embolism, and pulmonary oedema. Despite the substantial clinical literature in this area, it remains unclear whether their incidence is reduced by GDHT. This systematic review aims to determine the effect of GDHT on the respiratory outcomes listed above, in surgical patients.

We searched the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and clinical trial registries up until January 2020. We included all RCTs reporting pulmonary outcomes. The primary outcome was post-operative pulmonary complications and secondary outcomes were specific pulmonary complications and intra-operative fluid input. Data synthesis was performed on Review Manager and heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics.

We identified 66 studies with 9548 participants reporting pulmonary complications. GDHT resulted in a significant reduction in total pulmonary complications (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.92). The incidence of pulmonary infections, reported in 45 studies with 6969 participants, was significantly lower in the GDHT group (OR 0.72, CI 0.60 to 0.86). Pulmonary oedema was recorded in 23 studies with 3205 participants and was less common in the GDHT group (OR 0.47, CI 0.30 to 0.73). There were no differences in the incidences of pulmonary embolism or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Sub-group analyses demonstrated: (i) benefit from GDHT in general/abdominal/mixed and cardiothoracic surgery but not in orthopaedic or vascular surgery; and (ii) benefit from fluids with inotropes and/or vasopressors in combination but not from fluids alone. Overall, the GDHT group received more colloid (+280 ml) and less crystalloid (−375 ml) solutions than the control group. Due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity, we downgraded this evidence to moderate.

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that the use of GDHT using fluids with inotropes and/or vasopressors, but not fluids alone, reduces the development of post-operative pulmonary infections and pulmonary oedema in general, abdominal and cardiothoracic surgical patients. This evidence was graded as moderate.

PROSPERO registry reference: CRD42020170361

• Fluid therapy
• Goal-directed
• Surgery

• Fluid Therapy/methods
• Humans
• Length of Stay
• Perioperative Care/methods
• Postoperative Complications/prevention & control
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
• Surgical Procedures, Operative

Whether goal-directed fluid therapy based on dynamic predictors of fluid responsiveness (GDFTdyn) alone improves clinical outcomes in comparison with standard fluid therapy among patients undergoing surgery remains unclear.

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant studies. Studies comparing the effects of GDFTdyn with that of standard fluid therapy on clinical outcomes among adult patients undergoing surgery were considered eligible. Two analyses were performed separately: GDFTdyn alone versus standard fluid therapy and GDFTdyn with other optimization goals versus standard fluid therapy. The primary outcomes were short-term mortality and overall morbidity, while the secondary outcomes were serum lactate concentration, organ-specific morbidity, and length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and in hospital.

We included 37 studies with 2910 patients. Although GDFTdyn alone lowered serum lactate concentration (mean difference (MD) − 0.21 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval (CI) (− 0.39, − 0.03), P = 0.02), no significant difference was found between groups in short-term mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% CI (0.32, 2.24), P = 0.74), overall morbidity (OR 1.03, 95% CI (0.31, 3.37), P = 0.97), organ-specific morbidity, or length of stay in the ICU and in hospital. Analysis of trials involving the combination of GDFTdyn and other optimization goals (mainly cardiac output (CO) or cardiac index (CIx)) showed a significant reduction in short-term mortality (OR 0.45, 95% CI (0.24, 0.85), P = 0.01), overall morbidity (OR 0.41, 95% CI (0.28, 0.58), P < 0.00001), serum lactate concentration (MD − 0.60 mmol/L, 95% CI (− 1.04, − 0.15), P = 0.009), cardiopulmonary complications (cardiac arrhythmia (OR 0.58, 95% CI (0.37, 0.92), P = 0.02), myocardial infarction (OR 0.35, 95% CI (0.16, 0.76), P = 0.008), heart failure/cardiovascular dysfunction (OR 0.31, 95% CI (0.14, 0.67), P = 0.003), acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (OR 0.13, 95% CI (0.02, 0.74), P = 0.02), pneumonia (OR 0.4, 95% CI (0.24, 0.65), P = 0.0002)), length of stay in the ICU (MD − 0.77 days, 95% CI (− 1.07, − 0.46), P < 0.00001) and in hospital (MD − 1.18 days, 95% CI (− 1.90, − 0.46), P = 0.001).

It was not the optimization of fluid responsiveness by GDFTdyn alone but rather the optimization of tissue and organ perfusion by GDFTdyn and other optimization goals that benefited patients undergoing surgery. Patients managed with the combination of GDFTdyn and CO/CI goals might derive most benefit.

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2251-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

• Cardiac output
• Dynamic variables
• Goal-directed fluid therapy
• Surgery

• ICU LOS
• ICU costs
• dynamic assessment
• fluid responsiveness
• fluid therapy
• goal directed
• meta-analysis
• resuscitation

Adequate intravenous fluid therapy is essential in renal transplant recipients to ensure a good allograft perfusion. Central venous pressure (CVP) has been considered the cornerstone to guide the fluid therapy for decades; it was the only available simple tool worldwide. However, the revolutionary advances in assessing the dynamic preload variables together with the availability of new equipment to precisely measure the effect of intravenous fluids on the cardiac output had created a question mark on the future role of CVP. Despite the critical role of fluid therapy in the field of transplantation. There are only a few clinical studies that compared the CVP guided fluid therapy with the other modern techniques and their relation to the outcome in renal transplantation. Our work sheds some light on the available published data in renal transplantation, together with data from other disciplines evaluating the utility of central venous pressure measurement. Although lager well-designed studies are still required to consolidate the role of new techniques in the field of renal transplantation, we can confidently declare that the new techniques have the advantages of providing more accurate haemodynamic assessment, which results in a better patient outcome.

• Fluid monitoring
• Central venous pressure
• Renal transplantation

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness have been developed and investigated in clinical trials of goal-directed therapy. The impact of this approach on clinically relevant outcomes is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate whether fluid therapy guided by dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness compared with standard care improves clinically relevant outcomes in adults admitted to the ICU.

Randomized controlled trials from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to December 2016, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles.

Two reviewers independently identified randomized controlled trials comparing dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness with standard care for acute volume resuscitation in adults admitted to the ICU.

Two reviewers independently abstracted trial-level data including population characteristics, interventions, clinical outcomes, and source of funding. Our primary outcome was mortality at longest duration of follow-up. Our secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and frequency of renal complications. The internal validity of trials was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias tool.

We included 13 trials enrolling 1,652 patients. Methods used to assess fluid responsiveness included stroke volume variation (nine trials), pulse pressure variation (one trial), and stroke volume change with passive leg raise/fluid challenge (three trials). In 12 trials reporting mortality, the risk ratio for death associated with dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.42–0.83; I² = 0%; n = 1,586). The absolute risk reduction in mortality associated with dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was –2.9% (95% CI, –5.6% to –0.2%). Dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was associated with reduced duration of ICU length of stay (weighted mean difference, –1.16 d [95% CI, –1.97 to –0.36]; I² = 74%; n = 394, six trials) and mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference, –2.98 hr [95% CI, –5.08 to –0.89]; I² = 34%; n = 334, five trials). Three trials were adjudicated at unclear risk of bias; the remaining trials were at high risk of bias.

In adult patients admitted to intensive care who required acute volume resuscitation, goal-directed therapy guided by assessment of fluid responsiveness appears to be associated with reduced mortality, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. High-quality clinical trials in both medical and surgical ICU populations are warranted to inform routine care.