RESUMO
Laparoscopic robot-assisted colorectal surgery can pose significant haemodynamic challenges for patients with severe aortic regurgitation. The increased afterload caused by pneumoperitoneum and aortic compression, along with concurrent factors like hypercarbia, Trendelenburg positioning and ventilatory impairment, can worsen aortic regurgitation, leading to myocardial ischaemia and heart failure. Transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) assists haemodynamic management intraoperatively but requires subspecialist skills and enables limited inferences to be drawn regarding the impact of afterload on myocardial performance. Minimally invasive haemodynamic monitoring enabling real-time visualisation of a patient's 'pressure field' has been suggested as a potential adjunct or alternative to TOE, with the added advantage of providing continuous quantitative information about both stroke volume and the afterload to ventricular ejection in a single visualisation. We describe an example of successful concurrent use of pressure field haemodynamic monitoring and TOE in a patient with severe aortic regurgitation having a prolonged laparoscopic robot-assisted pelvic exenteration.
RESUMO
Background: The concept of a "textbook outcome" is emerging as a metric for ideal surgical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of an advanced haemodynamic monitoring (AHDM) algorithm on achieving a textbook outcome in patients undergoing hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. Methods: This retrospective, multicentre observational study was conducted across private and public teaching sectors in Victoria, Australia. We studied patients managed by a patient-specific, surgery-specific haemodynamic algorithm or via usual care. The primary outcome was the effect of using a patient-specific, surgery-specific AHDM algorithm for achieving a textbook outcome, with adjustment using propensity score matching. The textbook outcome criteria were defined according to the International Expert Delphi Consensus on Defining Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery and Nationwide Analysis of a Novel Quality Measure in Pancreatic Surgery. Results: Of the 780 weighted cases, 477 (61.2%, 95% CI: 57.7%-64.6%) achieved the textbook outcome. Patients in the AHDM group had a higher rate of textbook outcomes [n = 259 (67.8%)] than those in the Usual care group [n = 218 (54.8%); p < 0.001, estimated odds ratio (95% CI) 1.74 (1.30-2.33)]. The AHDM group had a lower rate of surgery-specific complications, severe complications, and a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) [OR 2.34 (95% CI: 1.30-4.21), 1.79 (95% CI: 1.12-2.85), and 1.83 (95% CI: 1.35-2.46), respectively]. There was no significant difference between the groups for hospital readmission and mortality. Conclusions: AHDM use was associated with improved outcomes, supporting its integration in hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. Prospective trials are warranted to further evaluate the impact of this AHDM algorithm on achieving a textbook impact on long-term outcomes.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Anemia and red cell transfusion contribute to morbidity and mortality of surgery. The concept of patient blood management to mitigate preoperative anemia, optimize coagulation, conserve red cells intraoperatively and accept lower post-operative transfusion thresholds has recently gained widespread acceptance across a range of surgical disciplines. Fluid administration is likely to contribute significantly to perioperative anemia and red-cell transfusion requirements, yet a robust basis for managing fluid administration in this context has not been articulated. There is an urgent need for this. METHODS: We developed 'the pressure field method' as a novel approach to guiding the administration of fluid and drugs to optimize tissue perfusion. The pressure field method was used for the intraoperative management of 67 patients undergoing semi-elective cardiac surgery. We compared intraoperative anemia and transfusion requirements in this cohort with a conventional group of 413 patients undergoing cardiac surgery. RESULTS: In the pressure field group, no patients required transfusion whereas in the conventional group, 16% required transfusion during bypass and these patients received an average of 2.4 units of packed red cells (P < 0.0001). The average decrease in hemoglobin in the pressure field group was only 13 g/L, whereas in the conventional group it was 52 g/L (P < 0.0001). 80% of the pressure field group received no intravenous fluid during cardiac surgery, and the average intraoperative fluid load was 115 mL. CONCLUSION: The pressure field method appears to reduce transfusion requirements due to decreased intraoperative fluid loading.
Assuntos
Anemia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos/métodos , Transfusão de Sangue , Transfusão de Eritrócitos , HemoglobinasRESUMO
The function of renal allografts in the perioperative period is partly dependent on minimizing hemodynamic instability. We have developed hemodynamic monitoring software-named the "pressure field"-that was utilized in a 68-year-old high-risk kidney transplant recipient. The "pressure field" was used to individualize fluid and drug administration and replicate the preoperative hemodynamics. The patient received net zero fluid intraoperatively and had an uneventful postoperative course. We found the pressure field method helpful to manage perioperative hemodynamics in this high-risk patient.