Association of the classification of intraoperative adverse events (ClassIntra) with complications and neurological outcome after neurosurgical procedures: a prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To analyze the reliability of the classification of intraoperative adverse events (ClassIntra) to reflect intraoperative complications of neurosurgical procedures and the potential to predict the postoperative outcome including the neurological performance. The ClassIntra classification was recently introduced and found to be reliable for assessing intraoperative adverse events and predicting postoperative complications across different surgical disciplines. Nevertheless, its potential role for neurosurgical procedures remains elusive. METHODS: This is a prospective, monocentric cohort study assessing the ClassIntra in 422 adult patients who underwent a neurosurgical procedure and were hospitalized between July 1, 2021, to December 31, 2021. The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative complications graded according to ClassIntra and the association with postoperative outcome reflected by the Clavien-Dindo classification and comprehensive complication index (CCI). The ClassIntra is defined as intraoperative adverse events as any deviation from the ideal course on a grading scale from grade 0 (no deviation) to grade V (intraoperative death) and was set at sign-out in agreement between neurosurgeon and anesthesiologist. Secondary outcomes were the neurological outcome after surgery as defined by Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), modified Rankin scale (mRS), Neurologic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (NANO) scale, National Institute Health of Strokes Scale (NIHSS), and Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), and need for unscheduled brain scan. RESULTS: Of 442 patients (mean [SD] age, 56.1 [16.2]; 235 [55.7%] women and 187 [44.3%] men) who underwent a neurosurgical procedure, 169 (40.0%) patients had an intraoperative adverse event (iAE) classified as ClassIntra I or higher. The NIHSS score at admission (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.03-1.63, female gender (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.84), extracranial procedures (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.08-0.61), and emergency cases (OR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.53-3.78) were independent risk factors for a more severe iAE. A ClassIntra ≥ II was associated with increased odds of postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo (p < 0.01), neurological deterioration at discharge (p < 0.01), prolonged hospital (p < 0.01), and ICU stay (p < 0.01). For elective craniotomies, severity of ClassIntra was associated with the CCI (p < 0.01) and need for unscheduled CT or MRI scan (p < 0.01). The proportion of a ClassIntra ≥ II was significantly higher for emergent craniotomies (56.2%) and associated with in-hospital mortality, and an unfavorable neurological outcome (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Findings of this study suggest that the ClassIntra is sensitive for assessing intraoperative adverse events and sufficient to identify patients with a higher risk for developing postoperative complications after a neurosurgical procedure.

Effect of thoracic epidural anesthesia on postoperative outcome in major liver surgery: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Postoperative complications after major liver surgery are common. Thoracic epidural anesthesia may provide beneficial effects on postoperative outcome. We strove to compare postoperative outcomes in major liver surgery patients with and without thoracic epidural anesthesia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study in a single university medical center. Patients undergoing elective major liver surgery between April 2012 and December 2016 were eligible for inclusion. We divided patients into two groups according to whether or not they had thoracic epidural anesthesia for major liver surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative hospital length of stay, i.e., from day of surgery until hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included 30-day postoperative mortality and major postoperative complications. Additionally, we investigated the effect of thoracic epidural anesthesia on perioperative analgesia doses and the safety of thoracic epidural anesthesia. RESULTS: Of 328 patients included in this study, 177 (54.3%) received thoracic epidural anesthesia. There were no clinically important differences in postoperative hospital length of stay (11.0 [7.00-17.0] vs. 9.00 [7.00-14.0] days, p = 0.316, primary outcome), death (0.0 vs. 2.7%, p = 0.995), or the incidence of postoperative renal failure (0.6 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.99), sepsis (0.0 vs. 1.3%, p = 0.21), or pulmonary embolism (0.6 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.59) between patients with or without thoracic epidural anesthesia. Perioperative analgesia doses - including the intraoperative sufentanil dose (0.228 [0.170-0.332] vs. 0.405 [0.315-0.565] µg·kg-1·h-1, p < 0.0001) - were lower in patients with thoracic epidural anesthesia. No major thoracic epidural anesthesia-associated infections or bleedings occurred. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis suggests that thoracic epidural anesthesia does not reduce postoperative hospital length of stay in patients undergoing major liver surgery - but it may reduce perioperative analgesia doses. Thoracic epidural anesthesia was safe in this cohort of patients undergoing major liver surgery. These findings need to be confirmed in robust clinical trials.

Validation of three nociception indices to predict immediate postoperative pain before emergence from general anaesthesia: a prospective double-blind, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Nociception monitoring devices are designed to estimate nociception during general anaesthesia. We evaluated the predictive accuracy of heart rate and three nociception indices to predict postoperative pain before emergence from general anaesthesia. METHODS: In patients undergoing trauma or orthopaedic surgery, HR, Surgical Pleth Index® (SPI), Pupillary Pain Index® (PPI), and Nociception Level® (NOL) were simultaneously recorded for 5 min after the end of surgery but before return of consciousness. After admission to the recovery room, pain scores were assessed regularly for 2 h. HR, SPI, PPI, and NOL were analysed for their predictive accuracy of postoperative pain and opioid consumption with assessment of area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curves, Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, and regression modelling. RESULTS: Data for 60 subjects were analysed. The AUC (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) of the predictive accuracy for moderate-to-severe postoperative pain differed between nociception indices (HR=0.46 [0.29-0.64], P=0.671; SPI=0.46 [0.31-0.61], P=0.621; PPI=0.52 [0.36-0.68], P=0.770; NOL=0.66 [0.51-0.81], P=0.038). In a multivariable logistic regression model, a higher predictive accuracy was found for a multivariable predictor combining NOL values with ASA physical status and information about use of regional anaesthesia (AUC=0.83 [0.72-0.94], P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Heart rate, Surgical Pleth Index, Pupillary Pain Index, and Nociception Level measured before emergence from general anaesthesia do not yet have sufficient diagnostic accuracy for prediction of postoperative pain. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05063227.

The impact of spinal anaesthesia on perioperative opioid consumption, postoperative pain and oncological outcome in radical retropubic prostatectomy-a retrospective before-and-after effectiveness study.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anaesthesia preceding general anaesthesia has been conducted for open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) to decrease immediate postoperative pain for many years. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of spinal anaesthesia to reduce postoperative opioid requirements remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of spinal anaesthesia preceding general anaesthesia on opioid requirements, postoperative pain and biochemical cancer-free survival. METHODS: This before-and-after effectiveness study investigated effects of two different anaesthesia techniques in 636 patients with RRP. Three hundred eighteen consecutive patients in the SPA group (spinal anaesthesia preceding general anaesthesia) were compared with 318 patients in the GA group (general anaesthesia alone). The primary endpoint of the study was opioid consumption in the post-anaesthesia care unit. Secondary endpoints were intraoperative opioid consumption, postoperative pain, postoperative recovery time, the length of hospital-stay, persistence of pain 1 year after surgery and cancer-free survival. Differences between the groups were analysed by a two-sided t-test, χ2-test, Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test and the influence of possible confounders on opioid consumption with a general linear model. Cancer-free survival was determined by Kaplan-Meier curves and group differences by log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: The total amount of morphine equivalent administered postoperatively was 7.5 [6.9; 8.1] mg in the SPA group and 6.0 [5.5; 6.5] mg in the GA group (mean [95% CI], p < 0.001). The amount of intraoperative sufentanil was 56.9 [55.1; 58.7] µg in the SPA group and 84.5 [82.5; 86.5] µg in the GA group (mean [95% CI], p < 0.001). There was no difference found in the postoperative pain level, length of hospital-stay and pain level 1 year after surgery. Biochemical cancer-free survival was highly related to TNM stage (p < 0.001, pT3 vs. pT2 hazard ratio 5.4 [95%CI 3.3; 9.2]) but not to the type of anaesthesia (p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anaesthesia preceding general anaesthesia for RRP is associated with increased postoperative opioid consumption compared to general anaesthesia alone. Postoperative pain level and the oncological outcome are not affected by the adjunctive use of spinal anaesthesia. Thus, the addition of spinal anaesthesia to general anaesthesia has no advantage in RRP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03565705.

A new noninvasive finger sensor (NICCI system) for continuous blood pressure and pulse pressure variation monitoring: A method comparison study in patients having neurosurgery.

BACKGROUND: The NICCI system (Getinge, Gothenburg, Sweden) is a new noninvasive haemodynamic monitoring system using a finger sensor. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate the performance of the NICCI system to measure blood pressure and pulse pressure variation compared with intra-arterial measurements. DESIGN: A prospective method comparison study. SETTING: University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. PATIENTS: Forty-seven neurosurgery patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed a method comparison study in 47 neurosurgery patients to compare NICCI blood pressure measurements (BP NICCI ) with intra-arterial blood pressure measurements (BP ART ) (Bland-Altman analysis, four-quadrant plot, error grid analysis) and NICCI pulse pressure variation measurements (PPV NICCI ) with pulse pressure variation calculated manually from the intra-arterial blood pressure waveform (PPV ART ) (Bland-Altman analysis, predictive agreement, Cohen's kappa). RESULTS: The mean of the differences ±â€Šstandard deviation (95% limits of agreement) between BP NICCI and BP ART was 11 ±â€Š10 mmHg (-8 to 30 mmHg) for mean blood pressure (MBP), 3 ±â€Š12 mmHg (-21 to 26 mmHg) for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and 12 ±â€Š10 mmHg (-8 to 31 mmHg) for diastolic blood pressure (DBP). In error grid analysis, 54% of BP NICCI and BP ART MBP measurement pairs were classified as 'no risk', 43% as 'low risk', 3% as 'moderate risk' and 0% as 'significant risk' or 'dangerous risk'. The mean of the differences between PPV NICCI and PPV ART was 1 ±â€Š3% (-4 to 6%). The predictive agreement between PPV NICCI and PPV ART was 80% and Cohen's kappa was 0.55. CONCLUSIONS: The absolute agreement between BP NICCI and BP ART was not clinically acceptable. We recommend not using the current version of the NICCI system for blood pressure monitoring during surgery. The absolute agreement between PPV NICCI and PPV ART was clinically acceptable with moderate predictive agreement regarding pulse pressure variation categories. The NICCI system needs to be further developed and re-evaluated when an improved version is available. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00023188) on 2 October 2020.

Continuous intra-arterial versus intermittent oscillometric arterial pressure monitoring and hypotension during induction of anaesthesia: the AWAKE randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypotension during induction of anaesthesia is associated with organ injury. Continuous arterial pressure monitoring might help reduce hypotension. We tested the hypothesis that continuous intra-arterial compared with intermittent oscillometric arterial pressure monitoring reduces hypotension during induction of anaesthesia in noncardiac surgery patients. METHODS: In this single-centre randomised trial, 242 noncardiac surgery patients in whom intra-arterial arterial pressure monitoring was planned were randomised to unblinded continuous intra-arterial or to intermittent oscillometric arterial pressure monitoring (with blinded intra-arterial arterial pressure monitoring) during induction of anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was the area under a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mm Hg within the first 15 min of induction of anaesthesia. Secondary endpoints included areas under MAP values of 60, 50, and 40 mm Hg and durations of MAP values <65, <60, <50, and <40 mm Hg. RESULTS: There were 224 subjects available for analysis. The median (25th-75th percentile) area under a MAP of 65 mm Hg was 15 (2-36) mm Hg • min in subjects assigned to continuous intra-arterial monitoring and 46 (7-111) mm Hg • min in subjects assigned to intermittent oscillometric monitoring (P<0.001). Subjects assigned to continuous intra-arterial monitoring had smaller areas under MAP values of 60, 50, and 40 mm Hg and shorter durations of MAP values <65, <60, <50, and <40 mm Hg than subjects assigned to intermittent oscillometric monitoring. CONCLUSION: Continuous intra-arterial arterial pressure monitoring reduces hypotension during induction of anaesthesia compared with intermittent oscillometric arterial pressure monitoring in noncardiac surgery patients. In patients for whom an arterial catheter is planned, clinicians might therefore consider inserting the arterial catheter before rather than after induction of anaesthesia. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04894019.

Effect of sedative premedication with oral midazolam on postanesthesia care unit delirium in older adults: a secondary analysis following an uncontrolled before-after design.

BACKGROUND: Sedative premedication with benzodiazepines has been linked with prolonged recovery and inadequate emergence during the immediate postoperative period. We aimed to analyze the association between postanesthesia care unit (PACU) delirium and sedative premedication with oral midazolam. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data before (midazolam cohort) and after (non-midazolam cohort) implementation of a restrictive strategy for oral premedication with midazolam. From March 2015 until July 2018, we included patients 60 years and older, who underwent elective radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to premedication with midazolam, preoperative anxiety, and a history of neurological disorders. Patients, who were scheduled for postoperative admission to the intensive care unit, were excluded. Between 2015 and 2016, patients received 7.5 mg oral midazolam preoperatively (midazolam cohort). Patients included between 2017 and 2018 did not receive any sedative medication preoperatively (non-midazolam cohort). The primary endpoint was the incidence of PACU delirium. RESULTS: PACU delirium rates were 49% in the midazolam cohort (n = 214) and 33% in the non-midazolam cohort (n = 218). This difference was not statistically significant on multivariable logistic regression analysis (OR 0.847 [95% CI 0.164; 4.367]; P = 0.842). Age (OR 1.102 [95% CI 1.050; 1.156]; P < 0.001), the cumulative dose of sufentanil (OR 1.014 [95% CI 1.005; 1.024]; P = 0.005), and propofol-sufentanil for anesthesia maintenance (OR 2.805 [95% CI 1.497; 5.256]; P = 0.001) were significantly associated with PACU delirium. CONCLUSION: Midazolam for sedative premedication was not significantly associated with PACU delirium. The reduction in the incidence of PACU delirium throughout the study period may be attributable to improvements in perioperative management other than a more restrictive preoperative benzodiazepine administration.

Impact of postanesthesia care unit delirium on self-reported cognitive function and perceived health status: a prospective observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine the influence of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) delirium on self-reported cognitive function and perceived health status 3 months after surgery. METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study was performed in a PACU at a high-volume prostate cancer center. We used a convenience sample of patients > 60 years undergoing elective radical prostatectomy. Patients with a history of cerebrovascular or neurodegenerative disease were excluded. Fifteen, 30, 45, and 60 following extubation, patients were screened for signs of delirium with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Three months after surgery self-reported cognitive function was assessed with the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire, and health status was evaluated with the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: Signs of PACU delirium were present in 32.4% (n = 72/222) of patients, and 80.2% (n = 178/222) completed the 3-month follow-up. The presence of PACU delirium signs was not significantly associated with self-reported cognitive failures (B = 0.60, 95% CI: -1.72; 2.92, p = 0.61) or SF-36 physical component scores (B = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.02; 0.36, p = 0.03) or SF-36 mental component scores (B = -0.03, 95% CI: -0.18, 0.11, p = 0.66) 3 months after radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of educated, highly functioning, elderly male patients who were assessed immediately after surgery and at a 3-month follow-up, we found no association between PACU delirium and self-reported cognitive failures or perceived health status, which implies that PACU delirium may be an event of limited duration and impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04168268, Date of registration: November 19, 2019).

Relationship Between Intraoperative and Preoperative Ambulatory Nighttime Heart Rates: A Secondary Analysis of a Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown what constitutes physiologically relevant intraoperative bradycardia. Intraoperative bradycardia is usually defined using absolute heart rate thresholds, ignoring preoperative baseline heart rates. In contrast, we considered defining intraoperative bradycardia relative to preoperative ambulatory nighttime heart rate. Specifically, we hypothesized that the individual mean intraoperative heart rate is lower than the mean preoperative ambulatory nighttime heart rate. We, therefore, sought to investigate the relationship between the intraoperative and preoperative ambulatory nighttime heart rates in adults having noncardiac surgery with general anesthesia. Additionally, we sought to investigate the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia using relative versus absolute heart rate thresholds. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a database from a prospective study including preoperative ambulatory and intraoperative heart rates in 363 patients having noncardiac surgery with general anesthesia. RESULTS: The mean intraoperative heart rate was lower than the mean nighttime heart rate (mean difference, -9 bpm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10 to -8 bpm; P < .001). The mean intraoperative heart rate was lower than the mean nighttime heart rate in 319 of 363 patients (88%; 95% CI, 84%-91%). The incidence of intraoperative bradycardia was 42% (95% CI, 38%-47%) when it was defined as intraoperative heart rate >30% lower than mean nighttime heart rate and 43% (95% CI, 38%-49%) when it was defined as intraoperative heart rate <45 bpm. CONCLUSIONS: The mean intraoperative heart rate is lower than the mean nighttime heart rate in about 9 of 10 patients. Intraoperative bradycardia might thus be physiologically and clinically important. Future research needs to investigate whether there is an association between intraoperative bradycardia and postoperative outcomes.

Guiding Opioid Administration by 3 Different Analgesia Nociception Monitoring Indices During General Anesthesia Alters Intraoperative Sufentanil Consumption and Stress Hormone Release: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: This pilot study investigated the effect of sufentanil titration by 3 different analgesia monitoring devices or clinical signs during general anesthesia. METHODS: Forty-eight patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy with sevoflurane/sufentanil anesthesia were randomly assigned into 4 groups and received sufentanil guided either by 1 of 3 analgesia monitoring devices (Surgical Pleth Index [SPI], Pupillary Pain Index [PPI], Nociception Level [NoL]) or by clinical judgment (control). The primary end point was intraoperative sufentanil consumption. Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and cortisol were measured at 4 time points during the day of surgery. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests and by mixed model and area under the curve (AUC) analyses for group comparisons and time effects of stress hormones. RESULTS: The total amount of sufentanil administration (µg·kg·minute·10) differed between the groups (median [quartiles]: control = 5.6 [4.4-6.4], SPI = 7.2 [4.8-8.4], PPI = 2.0 [1.8-2.9], NoL = 3.8 [3.3-5.1]; PPI versus SPI, -5.1 [-6.6 to -1.3], P < .001; NoL versus SPI, -3.0 [-5.2 to 0.2], P = .024; control versus SPI, -1.6 [-3.7 to 1.7], P = .128; NoL versus PPI, 1.7 [0.6-3.4], P < .001; control versus PPI, 3.4 [2.0-4.6], P < .001; control versus NoL, 1.6 [-0.2 to 3.3], P = .017) (Hodges-Lehmann estimator [99% confidence interval {CI}], P values). The AUC analysis indicated differences among groups in cumulative ACTH levels (ng·liter·minute, natural logarithm (ln)-transformed data) of NoL versus PPI (-1.079 [-1.950 to -0.208], P = .001) and PPI versus SPI (1.192 [0.317-2.068], P= .001), as well as differences in cortisol levels (µg·liter·minute) for PPI versus SPI (46,710 [21,145-72,274], P < .001), NoL versus SPI (27,645 [3163-52,126], P = .003), and control versus SPI (31,824 [6974-56,675], P = .001) (differences in means [99% CI], P value). Secondary end points (postoperative recovery, pain level, and analgesia medication) showed no differences. CONCLUSIONS: The type of analgesia nociception monitoring affected the total amount of sufentanil administered. Lower sufentanil doses in the PPI group were associated with an increased endocrine stress response. Titration by SPI caused no opioid reduction compared to the control but was associated with a reduced endocrine stress response.

Bispectral index guided titration of sevoflurane in on-pump cardiac surgery reduces plasma sevoflurane concentration and vasopressor requirements: a prospective, controlled, sequential two-arm clinical study.

BACKGROUND: Electroencephalographic-based monitoring systems such as the bispectral index (BIS) may reduce anaesthetic overdose rates. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesised that goal-directed sevoflurane administration (guided by BIS monitoring) could reduce the sevoflurane plasma concentration (SPC) and intraoperative vasopressor doses during on-pump cardiac surgery. DESIGN: A prospective, controlled, sequential two-arm clinical study. SETTING: German university medical centre with more than 2500 cardiac surgery interventions per year. PATIENTS: Sixty elective on-pump cardiac surgery patients. INTERVENTION: In group Sevo1.8% (n = 29), the sedation depth was maintained with a sustained inspired concentration of sevoflurane 1.8% before and during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). In group SevoBIS (n = 31), the inspired sevoflurane concentration was titrated to maintain a BIS target between 40 and 60. OUTCOME MEASURES: SPC during CPB and the intraoperative administration of noradrenaline. Additional analyses were performed on intraoperative awareness, postoperative blood lactate concentration, duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay and kidney injury. RESULTS: Mean inspired sevoflurane concentration was 0.8% in group SevoBIS, representing a 57.1% reduction (P < 0.001) compared with group Sevo1.8%. The mean SPC was 42.3 µg ml(-1) [95% confidence interval (CI) 40.0 to 44.6] in group Sevo1.8% and 21.0 µg ml(-1) (95% CI 18.8 to 23.3) in group SevoBIS, representing a 50.2% reduction (P < 0.001). During CPB, the mean cumulative dose of noradrenaline administered was 13.48 µg kg(-1) (95% CI 10.52 to 17.19) in group Sevo1.8% and 4.06 µg kg(-1) (95% CI 2.67 to 5.97) in group SevoBIS (P < 0.001). Pearson's correlation coefficient (between the cumulative applied dosage of sevoflurane calculated from the area under the curve of the SPC over time and the administered cumulative noradrenaline dose) was 0.607 (P < 0.001). No intraoperative awareness signs were detected. CONCLUSION: BIS-guided titration of sevoflurane reduces the SPC and decreases noradrenaline administration compared with routine care during on-pump cardiac surgery.

Cardiac index assessment using bioreactance in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery in ovarian carcinoma.

This clinical study compared the cardiac index (CI) assessed by the totally non-invasive method of bioreactance (CIBR) (NICOM™, Cheetah Medical, Vancouver, USA) to transpulmonary thermodilution (CITD) during cytoreductive surgery in ovarian carcinoma. The hypothesis was that CI could be assessed by bioreactance in an accurate and precise manner including accurate trending ability when compared to transpulmonary thermodilution. In 15 patients CIBR and CITD were assessed after induction of anesthesia, after opening of the peritoneum, hourly during the operative procedure, and 30 min after extubation. Trending ability was assessed between the described timepoints. In total 84 points of measurement were analyzed. Concordance correlation coefficient for repeated measures correlating the CIBR and CITD was 0.32. Bias was 0.26 l/min/m(2) (limits of agreement -1.39 and 1.92 l/min/m(2)). The percentage error was 50.7 %. Trending ability quantified by the mean of angles θ which are made by the ΔCI vector and the line of identity (y = x) showed a value for CIBR of θ = 23.4°. CI assessment by bioreactance showed acceptable accuracy and trending ability. However, its precision was poor. Therefore, CI measurement can not be solely based on bioreactance in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery in ovarian carcinoma.