Search

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether increases in PaCO2 during surgery lead to an increase in plasma potassium concentration and, if so, by how much. Hyperkalaemia may result in cardiac arrhythmias, muscle weakness or paralysis. The key objectives were to determine whether increases in PaCO2 during laparoscopic surgery induce increases in plasma potassium concentrations and, if so, to determine the magnitude of such changes. METHODS: A retrospective observational study of adult patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominal surgery was perfomed. The independent association between increases in PaCO2 and changes in plasma potassium concentration was assessed by performing arterial blood gases within 15 min of induction of anaesthesia and within 15 min of completion of surgery. RESULTS: 289 patients were studied (mean age of 63.2 years; 176 [60.9%] male, and mean body mass index of 29.3 kg/m2). At the completion of the surgery, PaCO2 had increased by 5.18 mmHg (95% CI 4.27 mmHg to 6.09 mmHg) compared to baseline values (P < 0.001) with an associated increase in potassium concentration of 0.25 mmol/L (95% CI 0.20 mmol/L to 0.31 mmol/L, P < 0.001). On multiple regression analysis, PaCO2 changes significantly predicted immediate changes in plasma potassium concentration and could account for 33.1% of the variance (r2 = 0.331, f(3,259) = 38.915, P < 0.001). For each 10 mmHg increment of PaCO2 the plasma potassium concentration increased by 0.18 mmol/L. CONCLUSION: In patients receiving laparoscopic abdominal surgery, there is an increase in PaCO2 at the end of surgery, which is independently associated with an increase in plasma potassium concentration. However, this effect is small and is mostly influenced by intravenous fluid therapy (Plasma-Lyte 148 solution) and the presence of diabetes. Trial registration Retrospectively registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (Trial Number: ACTRN12619000716167).

In this retrospective observational study performed in a high-volume hepatobiliary-pancreatic unit, we evaluated the effect of a surgery-specific goal-directed therapy (GDT) physiologic algorithm on complications and length of hospital stay. We compared patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with either a standardised Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program (usual care group), or a standardised Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program in combination with a surgery-specific cardiac output-guided algorithm (GDT group). We included 145 consecutive patients: 47 in the GDT group and 98 in the usual care group. Multivariable associations between GDT and lengths of stay and complications were investigated using negative binomial regression. Postoperative complications were common and occurred at similar frequencies amongst the GDT and usual care groups: 64% versus 68% respectively, P=0.71; odds ratio 0.82; (95% confidence interval 0.39-1.70). There were fewer cardiorespiratory complications in the GDT group. Median (interquartile range) length of hospital stay was ten days (8.0-14.0) in the GDT group compared to 13 days (8.8-21.3) in the usual care group, P=0.01. Median (interquartile range) total intraoperative fluid was 3,000 ml (2,050-4,175) in the GDT group compared to 4,500 ml (3,275-5,325) in the usual care group, P <0.0001; but by day one, the median (interquartile range) fluid balance was similar (1,198 ml [700-1,729] in the GDT group versus 977 ml [419-2,044] in the usual care group, P=0.96). Use of vasoactive medications was higher in the GDT group. In our patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, GDT was associated with restrictive intraoperative fluid intervention, fewer cardiorespiratory complications and a shorter hospital length of stay compared to usual care. However, we could not exclude an influence of surgical caseload, which we have previously found to be an important variable. We also could not relate the increased hospital length of stay to

BACKGROUND: Right hepatectomy is a complex procedure that carries inherent risks of perioperative morbidity. To evaluate outcome differences between a low central venous pressure fluid intervention strategy and a goal directed fluid therapy (GDFT) cardiac output algorithm we performed a retrospective observational study. We hypothesized that a GDFT protocol would result in less intraoperative fluid administration, reduced complications and a shorter length of hospital stay. METHODS: Patients undergoing hepatectomy using an established enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme between 2010 and 2017 were extracted from a prospectively managed electronic hospital database. Inclusion criteria included adult patients, undergoing open right (segments V-VIII) or extended right (segments IV-VIII) hepatectomy. PRIMARY OUTCOME: amount of intraoperative fluid administration used between the two groups. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: type and amount of vasoactive medications used, the development of predefined postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality. Complications were defined by the European Perioperative Clinical Outcome definitions and graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification. The association between GDFT and the amount of fluid and vasoactive medication used was investigated using logistic and linear regression models. RESULTS: Fifty-eight consecutive patients were identified. 26 patients received GDFT and 32 received Usual care. There were no significant differences in baseline patient characteristics. Less intraoperative fluid was used in the GDFT group: median (IQR) 2000 ml (1175 to 2700) vs. 2750 ml (2000 to 4000) in the Usual care group; p = 0.03. There were no significant differences in the use of vasoactive medications. Postoperative complications were similar: 9 patients (35%) in the GDFT group vs. 18 patients (56%) in the Usual care group; p = 0.10, OR: 0.41; (95%CI: 0.14 to 1.20). Median (IQR) length of stay for patients in t

BACKGROUND: The effect a restrictive goal directed therapy (GDT) fluid protocol combined with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme on hospital stay for patients undergoing major liver resection is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre randomized controlled pilot trial evaluating whether a patient-specific, surgery-specific intraoperative restrictive fluid optimization algorithm would improve duration of hospital stay and reduce perioperative fluid related complications. RESULTS: Forty-eight participants were enrolled. The median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 7.0 days (7.0:8.0) days in the restrictive fluid optimization algorithm group (Restrict group) vs. 8.0 days (6.0:10.0) in the conventional care group (Conventional group) (Incidence rate ratio 0.85; 95% Confidence Interval 0.71:1.1; p = 0.17). No statistically significant difference in expected number of complications per patient between groups was identified (IRR 0.85; 95%CI: 0.45-1.60; p = 0.60). Patients in the Restrict group had lower intraoperative fluid balances: 808 mL (571:1565) vs. 1345 mL (900:1983) (p = 0.04) and received a lower volume of fluid per kg/hour intraoperatively: 4.3 mL/kg/hr (2.6:5.8) vs. 6.0 mL/kg/hr (4.2:7.6); p = 0.03. No significant differences in the proportion of patients who received vasoactive drugs intraoperatively (p = 0.56) was observed. CONCLUSION: In high-volume hepatobiliary surgical units, the addition of a fluid restrictive intraoperative cardiac output-guided algorithm, combined with a standard ERAS protocol did not significantly reduce length of hospital stay or fluid related complications. Our findings are hypothesis-generating and a larger confirmatory study may be justified.

We aimed to evaluate perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without a cardiac output goal directed therapy (GDT) algorithm. We conducted a multicentre randomised controlled trial in four high volume hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery centres. We evaluated whether the additional impact of a intraoperative fluid optimisation algorithm would influence the amount of fluid delivered, reduce fluid related complications, and improve length of hospital stay. Fifty-two consecutive adult patients were recruited. The median (IQR) duration of surgery was 8.6 hours (7.1:9.6) in the GDT group vs. 7.8 hours (6.8:9.0) in the usual care group (p = 0.2). Intraoperative fluid balance was 1005mL (475:1873) in the GDT group vs. 3300mL (2474:3874) in the usual care group (p<0.0001). Total volume of fluid administered intraoperatively was also lower in the GDT group: 2050mL (1313:2700) vs. 4088mL (3400:4525), p<0.0001 and vasoactive medications were used more frequently. There were no significant differences in proportions of patients experiencing overall complications (p = 0.179); however, fewer complications occurred in the GDT group: 44 vs. 92 (Incidence Rate Ratio: 0.41; 95%CI 0.24 to 0.69, p = 0.001). Median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 9.5 days (IQR: 7.0, 14.3) in the GDT vs. 12.5 days in the usual care group (IQR: 9.0, 22.3) for an Incidence Rate Ratio 0.64 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.85, p = 0.002). In conclusion, using a surgery-specific, patient-specific goal directed restrictive fluid therapy algorithm in this cohort of patients, can justify using enough fluid without causing oedema, yet as little fluid as possible without causing hypovolaemia i.e. "precision" fluid therapy. Our findings support the use of a perioperative haemodynamic optimization plan that prioritizes preservation of cardiac output and organ perfusion pressure by judicious use of fluid therapy, rational use of vasoactive drugs and timely application of inotropic drugs. They also