↓ Skip to main content

Effect of perioperative goal-directed hemodynamic therapy on postoperative recovery following major abdominal surgery—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
21 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of perioperative goal-directed hemodynamic therapy on postoperative recovery following major abdominal surgery—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
Critical Care, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1728-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanxia Sun, Fang Chai, Chuxiong Pan, Jamie Lee Romeiser, Tong J. Gan

Abstract

Goal-directed hemodynamic therapy (GDHT) has been used in the clinical setting for years. However, the evidence for the beneficial effect of GDHT on postoperative recovery remains inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of perioperative GDHT in comparison with conventional fluid therapy on postoperative recovery in adults undergoing major abdominal surgery. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which researchers evaluated the effect of perioperative use of GDHT on postoperative recovery in comparison with conventional fluid therapy following abdominal surgery in adults (i.e., >16 years) were considered. The effect sizes with 95% CIs were calculated. Forty-five eligible RCTs were included. Perioperative GDHT was associated with a significant reduction in short-term mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.91, p = 0.004, I (2) = 0), long-term mortality (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.99, p = 0.04, I (2) = 4%), and overall complication rates (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.85, p < 0.0001, I (2) = 38%). GDHT also facilitated gastrointestinal function recovery, as demonstrated by shortening the time to first flatus by 0.4 days (95% CI -0.72 to -0.08, p = 0.01, I (2) = 74%) and the time to toleration of oral diet by 0.74 days (95% CI -1.44 to -0.03, p < 0.0001, I (2) = 92%). This systematic review of available evidence suggests that the use of perioperative GDHT may facilitate recovery in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 134 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 17 13%
Student > Master 17 13%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 9%
Other 31 23%
Unknown 28 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 76 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 37 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,826,640
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,619
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,996
of 331,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#31
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,880 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.