Anil Kumar Jain1, Asma M Khan. 1. New Delhi, India From the Department of Anesthesiology, Pain, and Perioperative Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital Marg.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: : The potential for fluid overload in large-volume liposuction is a source of serious concern. Fluid management in these patients is controversial and governed by various formulas that have been advanced by many authors. Basically, it is the ratio of what goes into the patient and what comes out. Central venous pressure has been used to monitor fluid therapy. Dynamic parameters, such as stroke volume and pulse pressure variation, are better predictors of volume responsiveness and are superior to static indicators, such as central venous pressure and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. Stroke volume variation was used in this study to guide fluid resuscitation and compared with one guided by an intraoperative fluid ratio of 1.2 (i.e., Rohrich formula). METHODS: : Stroke volume variation was used as a guide for intraoperative fluid administration in 15 patients subjected to large-volume liposuction. In another 15 patients, fluid resuscitation was guided by an intraoperative fluid ratio of 1.2. The amounts of intravenous fluid administered in the groups were compared. RESULTS: : The mean amount of fluid infused was 561 ± 181 ml in the stroke volume variation group and 2383 ± 1208 ml in the intraoperative fluid ratio group. The intraoperative fluid ratio when calculated for the stroke volume variation group was 0.936 ± 0.084. All patients maintained hemodynamic parameters (heart rate and systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure). Renal and metabolic indices remained within normal limits. CONCLUSION: : Stroke volume variation-guided fluid application could result in an appropriate amount of intravenous fluid use in patients undergoing large-volume liposuction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : Therapeutic, II.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: : The potential for fluid overload in large-volume liposuction is a source of serious concern. Fluid management in these patients is controversial and governed by various formulas that have been advanced by many authors. Basically, it is the ratio of what goes into the patient and what comes out. Central venous pressure has been used to monitor fluid therapy. Dynamic parameters, such as stroke volume and pulse pressure variation, are better predictors of volume responsiveness and are superior to static indicators, such as central venous pressure and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. Stroke volume variation was used in this study to guide fluid resuscitation and compared with one guided by an intraoperative fluid ratio of 1.2 (i.e., Rohrich formula). METHODS: : Stroke volume variation was used as a guide for intraoperative fluid administration in 15 patients subjected to large-volume liposuction. In another 15 patients, fluid resuscitation was guided by an intraoperative fluid ratio of 1.2. The amounts of intravenous fluid administered in the groups were compared. RESULTS: : The mean amount of fluid infused was 561 ± 181 ml in the stroke volume variation group and 2383 ± 1208 ml in the intraoperative fluid ratio group. The intraoperative fluid ratio when calculated for the stroke volume variation group was 0.936 ± 0.084. All patients maintained hemodynamic parameters (heart rate and systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure). Renal and metabolic indices remained within normal limits. CONCLUSION: : Stroke volume variation-guided fluid application could result in an appropriate amount of intravenous fluid use in patients undergoing large-volume liposuction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : Therapeutic, II.