Perioperative administration of buffered versus non-buffered crystalloid intravenous fluid to improve outcomes following adult surgical procedures: a Cochrane systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Buffered intravenous fluid preparations contain substrates to maintain acid-base status. The objective of this systematic review was to compare the effects of buffered and non-buffered fluids administered during the perioperative period on clinical and biochemical outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library until May 2017 and included all randomised controlled trials that evaluated buffered versus non-buffered fluids, whether crystalloid or colloid, administered to surgical patients. We assessed the selected studies for risk of bias and graded the level of evidence in accordance with Cochrane recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 19 publications of 18 randomised controlled trials, totalling 1096 participants. Mean difference (MD) in postoperative pH was 0.05 units lower immediately following surgery in the non-buffered group (12 studies of 720 participants; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.07; I 2 = 61%). This difference did not persist on postoperative day 1. Serum chloride concentration was higher in the non-buffered group at the end of surgery (10 trials of 530 participants; MD 6.77 mmol/L, 95% CI 3.38 to 10.17). This effect persisted until postoperative day 1 (5 trials of 258 participants; MD 8.48 mmol/L, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.88). Quality of this evidence was moderate. We identified variable protocols for fluid administration and total volumes of fluid administered to patients intraoperatively. Outcome data was variably reported at disparate time points and with heterogeneous patient groups. Consequently, the effect size and overall confidence interval was reduced, despite the relatively low inherent risk of bias. There was insufficient evidence on the effect of fluid composition on mortality and organ dysfunction. Confidence intervals of this outcome were wide and the quality of evidence was low (3 trials of 276 participants for mortality; odds ratio (OR) 1.85, 95% CI 0.37 to 9.33; I 2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Small effect sizes for biochemical outcomes and lack of correlated clinical follow-up data mean that robust conclusions on major morbidity and mortality associated with buffered versus non-buffered perioperative fluid choices are still lacking. Buffered fluid may have biochemical benefits, including a significant reduction in postoperative hyperchloraemia and metabolic acidosis.

Perioperative administration of buffered versus non-buffered crystalloid intravenous fluid to improve outcomes following adult surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative fluid strategies influence clinical outcomes following major surgery. Many intravenous fluid preparations are based on simple solutions, such as normal saline, that feature an electrolyte composition that differs from that of physiological plasma. Buffered fluids have a theoretical advantage of containing a substrate that acts to maintain the body's acid-base status - typically a bicarbonate or a bicarbonate precursor such as maleate, gluconate, lactate, or acetate. Buffered fluids also provide additional electrolytes, including potassium, magnesium, and calcium, more closely matching the electrolyte balance of plasma. The putative benefits of buffered fluids have been compared with those of non-buffered fluids in the context of clinical studies conducted during the perioperative period. This review was published in 2012, and was updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To review effects of perioperative intravenous administration of buffered versus non-buffered fluids for plasma volume expansion or maintenance, or both, on clinical outcomes in adults undergoing all types of surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We electronically searched the Clinicaltrials.gov major trials registry, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 6) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966 to June 2016), Embase (1980 to June 2016), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to June 2016). We handsearched conference abstracts and, when possible, contacted leaders in the field. We reran the search in May 2017. We added one potential new study of interest to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will incorporate this trial into formal review findings when we prepare the review update. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomized controlled trials that compared buffered versus non-buffered intravenous fluids for surgical patients were eligible for inclusion. We excluded other forms of comparison such as crystalloids versus colloids and colloids versus different colloids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened references for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We resolved disagreements by discussion and consensus, in collaboration with a third review author. We contacted trial authors to request additional information when appropriate. We presented pooled estimates for dichotomous outcomes as odds ratios (ORs) and for continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We analysed data via Review Manager 5.3 using fixed-effect models, and when heterogeneity was high (I² > 40%), we used random-effects models. MAIN RESULTS: This review includes, in total, 19 publications of 18 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1096 participants. We incorporated five of those 19 studies (330 participants) after the June 2016 update. Outcome measures in the included studies were thematically similar, covering perioperative electrolyte status, renal function, and acid-base status; however, we found significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity among the included studies. We identified variable protocols for fluid administration and total volumes of fluid administered to patients intraoperatively. Trial authors variably reported outcome data at disparate time points and with heterogeneous patient groups. Consequently, many outcome measures are reported in small group sizes, reducing overall confidence in effect size, despite relatively low inherent bias in the included studies. Several studies reported orphan outcome measures. We did not include in the results of this review one large, ongoing study of saline versus Ringer's solution.We found insufficient evidence on effects of fluid therapies on mortality and postoperative organ dysfunction (defined as renal insufficiency leading to renal replacement therapy); confidence intervals were wide and included both clinically relevant benefit and harm: mortality (Peto OR 1.85, 95% CI 0.37 to 9.33; I² = 0%; 3 trials, 6 deaths, 276 participants; low-quality evidence); renal insufficiency (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.98; I² = 0%; 4 trials, 22 events, 276 participants; low-quality evidence).We noted several metabolic differences, including a difference in postoperative pH measured at end of surgery of 0.05 units - lower in the non-buffered fluid group (12 studies with a total of 720 participants; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.07; I² = 61%). However, this difference was not maintained on postoperative day one. We rated the quality of evidence for this outcome as moderate. We observed a higher postoperative serum chloride level immediately after operation, with use of non-buffered fluids reported in 10 studies with a total of 530 participants (MD 6.77 mmol/L, 95% CI 3.38 to 10.17), and this difference persisted until day one postoperatively (five studies with a total of 258 participants; MD 8.48 mmol/L, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.88). We rated the quality of evidence for this outcome as moderate. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is insufficient to show effects of perioperative administration of buffered versus non-buffered crystalloid fluids on mortality and organ system function in adult patients following surgery. Benefits of buffered fluid were measurable in biochemical terms, particularly a significant reduction in postoperative hyperchloraemia and metabolic acidosis. Small effect sizes for biochemical outcomes and lack of correlated clinical follow-up data mean that robust conclusions on major morbidity and mortality associated with buffered versus non-buffered perioperative fluid choices are still lacking. Larger studies are needed to assess these relevant clinical outcomes.

A Technique to Allow Prone Positioning in the Spine Surgery Patient With Unstable Spine Fracture and Flail Segment Rib Fractures.

Two patients with unstable thoracic spine and flail segment rib fractures initially failed prone positioning on a Jackson spinal table used for posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion surgery. Both patients experienced rapid hemodynamic collapse. We developed a solution using the anterior portions of a thoracolumbosacral orthosis brace as chest supports to use during prone positioning, allowing both patients to undergo uncomplicated posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion surgeries with greater hemodynamic stability.

Fluid management and goal-directed therapy as an adjunct to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS).

Optimal perioperative fluid management is an important component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways. Fluid management within ERAS should be viewed as a continuum through the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. Each phase is important for improving patient outcomes, and suboptimal care in one phase can undermine best practice within the rest of the ERAS pathway. The goal of preoperative fluid management is for the patient to arrive in the operating room in a hydrated and euvolemic state. To achieve this, prolonged fasting is not recommended, and routine mechanical bowel preparation should be avoided. Patients should be encouraged to ingest a clear carbohydrate drink two to three hours before surgery. The goals of intraoperative fluid management are to maintain central euvolemia and to avoid excess salt and water. To achieve this, patients undergoing surgery within an enhanced recovery protocol should have an individualized fluid management plan. As part of this plan, excess crystalloid should be avoided in all patients. For low-risk patients undergoing low-risk surgery, a "zero-balance" approach might be sufficient. In addition, for most patients undergoing major surgery, individualized goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is recommended. Ultimately, however, the additional benefit of GDFT should be determined based on surgical and patient risk factors. Postoperatively, once fluid intake is established, intravenous fluid administration can be discontinued and restarted only if clinically indicated. In the absence of other concerns, detrimental postoperative fluid overload is not justified and "permissive oliguria" could be tolerated.

Oesophageal Doppler cardiac output monitoring: a longstanding tool with evolving indications and applications.

Much work has been done over the years to assess cardiac output and better grasp haemodynamic profiles of patients in critical care and during major surgery. Pulmonary artery catheterization has long been considered as the standard of care, especially in critical care environments, however this dogma has been challenged over the last 10-15 years. This has led to a greater focus on alternate, lesser invasive technologies. This review focuses on the scientific and clinical outcomes basis of oesophageal Doppler monitoring. The science underpinning Doppler shift assessment of velocity stretches back over 100 years, whereas the clinical applicability, and specifically clinical outcomes improvement can be attributed to the last 20 years. Oesophageal Doppler monitoring (ODM), and its associated protocol-guided fluid administration, has been shown to reduce complications, length of stay, and overall healthcare cost when incorporated into perioperative fluid management algorithms. However, more recent advances in enhanced recovery after surgery programs have led to similar improvements, leading the clinician to consider the role of Oesophageal Doppler Monitor to be more focused in high-risk surgery and/or the high-risk patient.

Reduced length of hospital stay in colorectal surgery after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal approach to perioperative care that combines a range of interventions to enable early mobilization and feeding after surgery. We investigated the feasibility, clinical effectiveness, and cost savings of an ERAS program at a major U. S. teaching hospital. METHODS: Data were collected from consecutive patients undergoing open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery during 2 time periods, before and after implementation of an ERAS protocol. Data collected included patient demographics, operative, and perioperative surgical and anesthesia data, need for analgesics, complications, inpatient medical costs, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: There were 99 patients in the traditional care group, and 142 in the ERAS group. The median length of stay (LOS) was 5 days in the ERAS group compared with 7 days in the traditional group (P < 0.001). The reduction in LOS was significant for both open procedures (median 6 vs 7 days, P = 0.01), and laparoscopic procedures (4 vs 6 days, P < 0.0001). ERAS patients had fewer urinary tract infections (13% vs 24%, P = 0.03). Readmission rates were lower in ERAS patients (9.8% vs 20.2%, P = 0.02). DISCUSSION: Implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol for colorectal surgery at a tertiary medical center was associated with a significantly reduced LOS and incidence of urinary tract infection. This is consistent with that of other studies in the literature and suggests that enhanced recovery programs could be implemented successfully and should be considered in U.S. hospitals.

Low central venous pressure versus acute normovolemic hemodilution versus conventional fluid management for reducing blood loss in radical retropubic prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare acute normovolemic hemodilution versus low central venous pressure strategy versus conventional fluid management in reducing intraoperative estimated blood loss, hematocrit drop and need for blood transfusion in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy under general anesthesia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy under general anesthesia were randomized to conventional fluid management, acute normovolemic hemodilution or low central venous pressure (≤5 mmHg). Treatment effects on estimated blood loss and hematocrit change were tested in multivariable regression models accounting for surgeon, prostate size, and all two-way interactions. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients completed the study. Estimated blood loss (mean ± SD) was significantly lower with low central venous pressure (706 ± 362 ml) compared to acute normovolemic hemodilution (1103 ± 635 ml) and conventional (1051 ± 714 ml) groups (p = 0.0134). There was no difference between the groups in need for blood transfusion, or hematocrit drop from preoperative values. The multivariate model predicting estimated blood loss showed a significant effect of treatment (p = 0.0028) and prostate size (p = 0.0323), accounting for surgeon (p = 0.0013). In the model predicting hematocrit change, accounting for surgeon difference (p = 0.0037), the treatment effect depended on prostate size (p = 0.0007) with the slope of low central venous pressure differing from the other two groups. Hematocrit was predicted to drop more with increased prostate size in acute normovolemic hemodilution and conventional groups but not with low central venous pressure. KEY LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the inability to blind providers to group assignment, possible variability between providers in estimation of blood loss, and the relatively small sample size that was not powered to detect differences between the groups in need for blood transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining low central venous pressure reduced estimated blood loss compared to conventional fluid management and acute normovolemic hemodilution in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy but there was no difference in allogeneic blood transfusion between the groups.

Perioperative buffered versus non-buffered fluid administration for surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative fluid therapy influences clinical outcomes following major surgery. Fluid preparations may be based on a simple non-buffered salt solution, such as normal saline, or may be modified with bicarbonate or bicarbonate precursor buffers, such as maleate, gluconate, lactate or acetate, to better reflect the human physiological state. These latter fluids have theoretical advantages over normal saline in preventing hyperchloraemic acidosis. A number of clinical studies have now compared fluid preparations with and without a buffer to achieve a balanced electrolyte solution for perioperative fluid resuscitation. OBJECTIVES: To review the safety and efficacy of perioperative administration of buffered versus non-buffered fluids for plasma volume expansion or maintenance in adult patients undergoing surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We electronically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2011), EMBASE (1980 to May 2011), and CINAHL (1982 to May 2011). We handsearched conference abstracts and where possible, contacted leaders in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included randomized trials of buffered versus non-buffered intravenous fluids for perioperative fluid resuscitation. The trials with other forms of comparisons such as crystalloids versus colloids and colloids versus different colloids were excluded. We also excluded trials using hypertonic fluids and dextrose-based fluids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of clinical trials. We resolved any disagreements by discussion. We contacted the trial authors to provide additional information where appropriate. We presented pooled estimates of the dichotomous outcomes as odds ratios (OR) and on continuous outcomes as mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We analysed data on Review Manager 5.1 using fixed-effect models, and when heterogeneity was high (I² > 40%) random-effect models were used. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 14 publications reporting 13 trials or comparisons with a total of 706 participants. For many of the outcomes reported, there was significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity. The primary outcome of mortality at any time was reported in only three studies with a total of 267 patients. The mortality rate was 2.9% for the buffered fluids group and 1.5% for the non-buffered fluids group but this difference was not statistically significant. The Peto OR was 1.85 (95% CI 0.37 to 9.33, P = 0.45, I(2)= 0%). Organ dysfunction was only presented for renal impairment. There was no difference in renal insufficiency leading to renal replacement therapy between the buffered and non-buffered groups (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.63, P = 0.32, I(2) = 0%). Markers of organ system failure as assessed by urine output, creatinine and its variables (for renal function), PaC0(2) (respiratory function) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (gastro-intestinal function) showed a statistically significant difference only in PaC0(2) levels. The mean difference was 1.18 with lower PaC0(2) levels in the non-buffered fluid group (95% CI 0.09 to 2.28, P = 0.03, I(2) = 0%) compared to the buffered fluid group.There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss nor the volumes of intraoperative red cell or fresh frozen plasma transfused between groups. There was an increase in platelet transfusion in the non-buffered group which was statistically significant after analysing the transformed data (log transformation because the data were highly skewed).A number of metabolic differences were noted. There was a difference in postoperative pH of 0.06 units, lower in the non-buffered fluid group (95% CI 0.04 to 0.08, P < 0.00001, I(2) = 74%). However, this difference was not maintained on postoperative day one. The non-buffered fluid group also had significantly greater base deficit, serum sodium and chloride levels.There was no difference demonstrated in length of hospital stay and no data were reported on cost or quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The administration of buffered fluids to adult patients during surgery is equally safe and effective as the administration of non-buffered saline-based fluids. The use of buffered fluids is associated with less metabolic derangement, in particular hyperchloraemia and metabolic acidosis. Larger studies are needed to assess robust outcomes such as mortality.

Goal-directed or goal-misdirected - how should we interpret the literature?

Goal-directed therapy (GDT) can be a vague term, meaning different things to different people and, depending on the clinical environment, sometimes even different things to the same person. It can refer to perioperative fluid management, clinicians driving oxygen delivery to supramaximal values, early treatment of sepsis in the emergency department, and even to restriction of perioperative crystalloids with the goal of maintaining preadmission body weight. Understandably, strong opinions about GDT vary; some clinicians consider it essential for perioperative care, others completely ineffective in critically ill patients. This commentary aims to further position the excellent review by Lees and colleagues in the context of the critical care and perioperative setting.

Processed electroencephalogram during donation after cardiac death.

We present a case series of increased bispectral index values during donation after cardiac death (DCD). During the DCD process, a patient was monitored with processed electroencephalogram (EEG), which showed considerable changes traditionally associated with lighter planes of anesthesia immediately after withdrawal of care. Subsequently, to validate the findings of this case, processed EEG was recorded during 2 other cases in which care was withdrawn without the use of hypnotic or anesthetic drugs. We found that changes in processed EEG immediately after withdrawal of care were not only reproducible, but can happen in the absence of changes in major electromyographic or electrocardiographic artifact. It is well documented that processed EEG is prone to artifacts. However, in the setting of DCD, these changes in processed EEG deserve some consideration. If these changes are not due to artifact, dosing of hypnotic or anesthetic drugs might be warranted. Use of these drugs during DCD based primarily on processed EEG values has never been addressed.

Colloids and crystalloids: does it matter to the kidney?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight some of the recent key issues surrounding crystalloid and colloid fluid management of critically ill patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Significant developments have been made in the understanding of ionic balance of fluids and their effects on acid-base, the role of hydration and overhydration, alkalinization of fluids in patients at high risk for contrast induced nephropathy, and finally the role of colloids in acute kidney injury. SUMMARY: Despite hydration remaining a key principle in fluid management in many patients, volume overload is of considerable concern. Recent evidence also suggests that balanced electrolyte formulations are preferable to saline-based formulations in a variety of clinical settings. Furthermore, alkalinization of fluids is protective in the setting of contrast-induced nephropathy. Oncotic load appears to be the most important factor in acute kidney injury associated with colloid fluid therapy.

Goal-directed fluid management with trans-oesophageal Doppler.

Major surgery is associated with significant trauma and is a potential cause of multiple system organ failure and death. Measurement of cardiac output using a variety of techniques during the perioperative period has enabled practitioners to proactively optimise stroke volume and cardiac output in an attempt to reduce postoperative complications. Although pulmonary artery catheter has been widely used and considered as the gold standard for measuring cardiac output, recent advancement of technology has seen the development of a number of less-invasive haemodynamic monitors. Oesophageal Doppler ultrasonography is a minimally invasive method for measuring stroke volume and cardiac output. It is user-friendly and is one of the few low-invasive technologies to date, which has been used successfully to guide intra-operative fluid administration, resulting in improvement in outcome and significant reduction in duration of hospital stay.

Definitions and epidemiology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This is the first part of an eight paper review series on postoperative problems. This section will focus on common postoperative complications with an emphasis on definitions and epidemiology. The major topics covered are cardiovascular and respiratory complications. Other sections will highlight central nervous system and renal complications, postoperative nausea and vomiting, hypothermia, injuries and perioperative mortality. More details on specific problems will be covered later in the series. RECENT FINDINGS: The review will highlight recent aims to standardize definitions of postoperative morbidity. SUMMARY: Standardization of definitions is essential to enable high-quality multicenter, multinational research to be carried out. This is vital as we continue to focus on improving patient outcomes.

Hepatic parenchymal transection with vascular staplers: a comparative analysis with the crush-clamp technique.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective study compares the safety and efficacy of hepatic parenchymal transection using vascular staplers (VS) and the crush-clamp (CC) technique. METHODS: Demographics, clinicopathologic data, treatments, and postoperative outcomes from patients who underwent VS or CC hepatic parenchymal transection were compared. RESULTS: From 1996-2006, 99 and 112 patients underwent hepatic transection with VS and CC, respectively. Compared to CC, VS transection was associated with less operative time (median 210 vs 275 minutes), blood loss (median 250 vs 500 mL), and postoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (29% vs 44%), all P < .05. VS transection was not associated with RBC transfusion on multivariate analysis. There were no differences in rates of positive resection margins (9% vs 13%), postoperative mortality (2% vs 4%), overall morbidity (32% vs 29%), and severe morbidity (20% vs. 23%), all P > .05. CONCLUSION: Hepatic parenchymal transection with VS can be accomplished with similar safety and efficacy as CC transection.

Fluid therapy in organ transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Fluid management remains a controversial subject in perioperative medicine and organ transplantation. Various case series, anecdotes and tradition guide many fluid choices, especially when good evidence is lacking. Recent advances in the understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmodynamic profiles of fluids, as well as transplantation physiology and pathophysiology, can guide us in new approaches to common problems. RECENT FINDINGS: This review is intended to describe some of the latest thinking on subjects like saline-induced hyperchloraemic metabolic acidosis, the use of goal-directed approaches to volume resuscitation in perioperative medicine, the relative lack of evidence for low central venous pressure techniques in liver transplantation, some of the drug effects of intravenous fluids, as well as the complex issue of different crystalloids and colloids in renal transplantation. SUMMARY: Fluid therapy in transplant medicine is usually best practiced using goal-directed approaches and balanced electrolyte formulations when possible, even in renal failure. Some fluids may exert drug effects that could alter organ preservation and reperfusion, while the certain hydroxyethyl starches appear to be less toxic in renal transplantation than first suspected, especially when clinicians consider free water requirements in these settings.

Calcium supplementation of saline-based colloids does not produce equivalent coagulation profiles to similarly balanced salt preparations.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that calcium alone does not account for the observed coagulation differences between saline-based and balanced electrolyte IV fluid preparations. DESIGN: Controlled, nonblinded, in vitro observational study. SETTING: University-based anesthesia research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Ten healthy volunteers. INTERVENTIONS: The volunteers donated fresh blood for in vitro 40% and 60% dilution with 6 intravenous fluid preparations (lactated Ringer's solution, human albumin solution, and 4 hydroxyethyl starch preparations). All saline-based fluids were supplemented with calcium chloride to obtain ionized concentrations >or=1.0 mmol/L. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After dilution of the fresh blood with the study fluids, samples were analyzed by using the Thrombelastograph. Three colloid preparations produced minimal coagulation derangement, even at 60% dilution (human albumin solution, tetrastarch in saline, and pentastarch in balanced electrolyte solution), whereas pentastarch in saline and hetastarch in balanced electrolyte produced a mildly hypocoagulable state at 60% dilution. CONCLUSIONS: The different coagulation profiles between the 2 pentastarch preparations, as well as similar profiles of pentastarch in saline and hetastarch in balanced electrolyte solution, suggest that calcium is not solely responsible for previously observed effects.