↓ Skip to main content

A pragmatic multi-center trial of goal-directed fluid management based on pulse pressure variation monitoring during high-risk surgery

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
A pragmatic multi-center trial of goal-directed fluid management based on pulse pressure variation monitoring during high-risk surgery
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12871-017-0356-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luiz Marcelo Sá Malbouisson, João Manoel Silva, Maria José Carvalho Carmona, Marcel Rezende Lopes, Murilo Santucci Assunção, Jorge Luís dos Santos Valiatti, Claudia Marques Simões, José Otavio Costa Auler

Abstract

Intraoperative fluid therapy guided by mechanical ventilation-induced pulse-pressure variation (PPV) may improve outcomes after major surgery. We tested this hypothesis in a multi-center study. The patients were included in two periods: a first control period (control group; n = 147) in which intraoperative fluids were given according to clinical judgment. After a training period, intraoperative fluid management was titrated to maintain PPV < 10% in 109 surgical patients (PPV group). We performed 1:1 propensity score matching to ensure the groups were comparable with regard to age, weight, duration of surgery, and type of operation. The primary endpoint was postoperative hospital length of stay. After matching, 84 patients remained in each group. Baseline characteristics, surgical procedure duration and physiological parameters evaluated at the start of surgery were similar between the groups. The volume of crystalloids (4500 mL [3200-6500 mL] versus 5000 mL [3750-8862 mL]; P = 0.01), the number of blood units infused during the surgery (1.7 U [0.9-2.0 U] versus 2.0 U [1.7-2.6 U]; P = 0.01), the fraction of patients transfused (13.1% versus 32.1%; P = 0.003) and the number of patients receiving mechanical ventilation at 24 h (3.2% versus 9.7%; P = 0.027) were smaller postoperatively in PPV group. Intraoperative PPV-based improved the composite outcome of postoperative complications OR 0.59 [95% CI 0.35-0.99] and reduced the postoperative hospital length of stay (8 days [6-14 days] versus 11 days [7-18 days]; P = 0.01). In high-risk surgeries, PPV-directed volume loading improved postoperative outcomes and decreased the postoperative hospital length of stay. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier; retrospectively registered- NCT03128190.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Other 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Mathematics 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,434,884
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#1,188
of 1,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,192
of 316,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#28
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,507 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 316,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.