Divya Srivastava1, Sandeep Sahu2, Abhilash Chandra3, Tanmay Tiwari2, Sanjay Kumar2, P K Singh2. 1. Department of Anaesthesiology, UP Rural Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Safai, Etawah, 206130, UP, India. dr.divshri@gmail.com. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, UP, India. 3. Department of Nephrology, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, UP, India.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Transesophageal Doppler (TED)-guided intraoperative fluid therapy has shown to noninvasively optimize intravascular volume and reduce postoperative morbidity. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Doppler-guided intraoperative fluid administration and central venous pressure (CVP)-guided fluid therapy on renal allograft outcome and postoperative complications. METHODS: A prospective nonrandomized active controlled study was conducted on end-stage renal disease patients scheduled for living donor renal transplant surgery. 110 patients received intraoperative fluid guided by corrected flow time (FTc) and variation in stroke volume values obtained by continuous TED monitoring. Data of 104 patients in whom intraoperative fluid administration was guided by CVP values were retrospectively obtained for a control. RESULTS: The amount of intraoperative fluid given in the study group (12.20 ± 4.24 ml/kg/h) was significantly lower than in the controls (22.21 ± 4.67 ml/kg/h). The amount of colloid used was also significantly less and fewer recipients were seen to require colloid (69 vs 85%). The mean arterial pressures were comparable throughout. CVP reached was 7.18 ± 3.17 mmHg in the study group. It was significantly higher in the controls (13.42 ± 3.12 mmHg). The postoperative graft function and rate of dysfunction were comparable. Side-effects like postoperative dyspnoea (4.8 vs 0%) and tissue edema (9.6 vs 2.7%) were higher in the controls. CONCLUSIONS: FTc-guided intraoperative fluid therapy achieved the same rate of immediate graft function as CVP-guided fluid therapy but used a significantly less amount of fluid. The incidence of postoperative complications related to fluid overload was also reduced. The use of TED may replace invasive central line insertions in the future.
PURPOSE: Transesophageal Doppler (TED)-guided intraoperative fluid therapy has shown to noninvasively optimize intravascular volume and reduce postoperative morbidity. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Doppler-guided intraoperative fluid administration and central venous pressure (CVP)-guided fluid therapy on renal allograft outcome and postoperative complications. METHODS: A prospective nonrandomized active controlled study was conducted on end-stage renal diseasepatients scheduled for living donor renal transplant surgery. 110 patients received intraoperative fluid guided by corrected flow time (FTc) and variation in stroke volume values obtained by continuous TED monitoring. Data of 104 patients in whom intraoperative fluid administration was guided by CVP values were retrospectively obtained for a control. RESULTS: The amount of intraoperative fluid given in the study group (12.20 ± 4.24 ml/kg/h) was significantly lower than in the controls (22.21 ± 4.67 ml/kg/h). The amount of colloid used was also significantly less and fewer recipients were seen to require colloid (69 vs 85%). The mean arterial pressures were comparable throughout. CVP reached was 7.18 ± 3.17 mmHg in the study group. It was significantly higher in the controls (13.42 ± 3.12 mmHg). The postoperative graft function and rate of dysfunction were comparable. Side-effects like postoperative dyspnoea (4.8 vs 0%) and tissue edema (9.6 vs 2.7%) were higher in the controls. CONCLUSIONS: FTc-guided intraoperative fluid therapy achieved the same rate of immediate graft function as CVP-guided fluid therapy but used a significantly less amount of fluid. The incidence of postoperative complications related to fluid overload was also reduced. The use of TED may replace invasive central line insertions in the future.
Authors: A De Gasperi; S Narcisi; E Mazza; L Bettinelli; M Pavani; L Perrone; C Grugni; A Corti Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: Marieke Voet; Elisabeth A M Cornelissen; Michel F P van der Jagt; Joris Lemson; Ignacio Malagon Journal: Paediatr Anaesth Date: 2021-08-20 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Maria Helena Calixto Fernandes; Thomas Schricker; Sheldon Magder; Roupen Hatzakorzian Journal: Crit Care Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 9.097