Search

Aim: The effectiveness of goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) algorithms in improving postoperative outcomes has extensively been suggested. Nevertheless, there is a lack of strong evidence regarding both the clinical impact and the cost-effectiveness of the GDFT protocols. The aim of this study is to evaluate the costs of patients undergoing hepatobiliopancreatic surgery when a GDFT protocol is applied. Materials & methods: Consecutive ASA I-III patients undergoing hepatobiliopancreatic surgery were included in this prospective observational study. Depending on device availability, patients were handled either by fluid therapy guided by Vigileo monitor-derived hemodynamic variables (Vigileo-GDFT group) or by standard fluid treatment (standard group). Postoperative length of stay and economic costs were analyzed., Results: In total, 147 patients were included (71 in the Vigileo-GDFT group and 76 in the standard group). The total hospital length of stay was 13 (median, 1st-3rd quartile, 9-20) days for the Vigileo-GDFT group and 14 (8-21) days for the standard group (p = 0.58); no statistically significant differences between the two groups emerged regarding costs and postoperative complications. In both groups, complications were the main contributor to total cost sustained., Conclusion: The application of a GDFT algorithm did not reduce the total length of hospital stay and the global costs, which were mainly influenced by the number of complications.

Objective: An intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is used routinely in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery to prevent or treat low-cardiac-output syndrome and to reduce perioperative mortality. The insertion and management of IABP carry the risk of major vascular complications. The authors reviewed their database to ascertain the incidence of IABP-related severe complications., Design: A retrospective study., Setting: A teaching hospital., Participants: Ten thousand three hundred sixty-five patients scheduled for elective or emergency cardiac surgery over a 12-year period at a single center., Interventions: Four hundred twenty-three patients received an IABP perioperatively. Careful preoperative screening for peripheral arterial disease, strict postoperative control, and the sheathless insertion technique to spare the arterial flow to the lower limb were performed routinely., Measurements and Main Results: The use of a perioperative IABP was 0.7% at the beginning of the observation period in 1999 and 7.3% in 2010, showing a fluctuating trend. Two patients (0.47%) died of direct complications, arterial wall damage and bleeding. Immediate surgical exploration and control of bleeding were followed by multiple-organ failure and death. Vascular complications, leading to lower-limb ischemia, occurred in 4 of 423 patients (0.94%). All of them underwent urgent vascular surgery and survived. Local sepsis occurred in 2 other patients (0.47%)., Conclusions: These data indicate that an IABP is a valuable option in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery even if not devoid of intrinsic risks for vascular complications (0.94%), septic complications (0.47%) and mortality (0.47%)., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)