Postoperative transfusion hemoglobin threshold and functional recovery after high-risk oncologic surgery: A randomized controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Robust evidence to inform best transfusion management after major oncologic surgery, where postoperative recovery might impact treatment regimens for cancer, is lacking. We conducted a study to validate the feasibility of a larger trial comparing liberal versus restrictive red blood cells (RBC) transfusion strategies after major oncologic surgery. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a two-center, randomized, controlled, study of patients admitted to the intensive care unit after major oncologic surgery. Patients whose hemoglobin level dropped below 9.5 g/dL, were randomly assigned to immediately receive a 1-unit RBC transfusion (liberal) or delayed until the hemoglobin level dropped below 7.5 g/dL (restrictive). The primary outcome was the median hemoglobin level between randomization to day 30 post-surgery. Disability-free survival was evaluated by the WHODAS 2.0 questionnaire. RESULTS: 30 patients were randomized (15 patients/group) in 15 months with a mean recruitment rate of 1.8 patients per month. The median hemoglobin level was significantly higher in the liberal group than in the restrictive group: 10.1 g/dL (IQR 9.6-10.5) versus 8.8 g/dL (IQR 8.3-9.4), p < .001, and RBC transfusion rates were 100% versus 66.7%, p = .04. The disability-free survival was similar between groups: 26.7% versus 20%, p = 1. DISCUSSION: Our results support the feasibility of a phase 3 randomized controlled trial comparing the impact of liberal versus restrictive transfusion strategies on the functional recovery of critically ill patients following major oncologic surgery.

Effect of Hydroxyethyl Starch vs Saline for Volume Replacement Therapy on Death or Postoperative Complications Among High-Risk Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: The FLASH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It is not known if use of colloid solutions containing hydroxyethyl starch (HES) to correct for intravascular deficits in high-risk surgical patients is either effective or safe. Objective: To evaluate the effect of HES 130/0.4 compared with 0.9% saline for intravascular volume expansion on mortality and postoperative complications after major abdominal surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial of 775 adult patients at increased risk of postoperative kidney injury undergoing major abdominal surgery at 20 university hospitals in France from February 2016 to July 2018; final follow-up was in October 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive fluid containing either 6% HES 130/0.4 diluted in 0.9% saline (n = 389) or 0.9% saline alone (n = 386) in 250-mL boluses using an individualized hemodynamic algorithm during surgery and for up to 24 hours on the first postoperative day, defined as ending at 7:59 am the following day. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of death or major postoperative complications at 14 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included predefined postoperative complications within 14 days after surgery, durations of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and all-cause mortality at postoperative days 28 and 90. Results: Among 826 patients enrolled (mean age, 68 [SD, 7] years; 91 women [12%]), 775 (94%) completed the trial. The primary outcome occurred in 139 of 389 patients (36%) in the HES group and 125 of 386 patients (32%) in the saline group (difference, 3.3% [95% CI, -3.3% to 10.0%]; relative risk, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.91-1.34]; P = .33). Among 12 prespecified secondary outcomes reported, 11 showed no significant difference, but a statistically significant difference was found in median volume of study fluid administered on day 1: 1250 mL (interquartile range, 750-2000 mL) in the HES group and 1500 mL (interquartile range, 750-2150 mL) in the saline group (median difference, 250 mL [95% CI, 83-417 mL]; P = .006). At 28 days after surgery, 4.1% and 2.3% of patients had died in the HES and saline groups, respectively (difference, 1.8% [95% CI, -0.7% to 4.3%]; relative risk, 1.76 [95% CI, 0.79-3.94]; P = .17). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients at risk of postoperative kidney injury undergoing major abdominal surgery, use of HES for volume replacement therapy compared with 0.9% saline resulted in no significant difference in a composite outcome of death or major postoperative complications within 14 days after surgery. These findings do not support the use of HES for volume replacement therapy in such patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02502773.

Continuous non-invasive vs. invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring during neuroradiological procedure: a comparative, prospective, monocentric, observational study.

BACKGROUND: In the perioperative setting, the most accurate way to continuously measure arterial blood pressure (ABP) is using an arterial catheter. Surrogate methods such as finger cuff have been developed to allow non-invasive measurements and are increasingly used, but need further evaluation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and clinical concordance between two devices for the measurement of ABP during neuroradiological procedure. METHODS: This is a prospective, monocentric, observational study. All consecutive patients undergoing a neuroradiological procedure were eligible. Patients who needed arterial catheter for blood pressure measurement were included. During neuroradiological procedure, ABP (systolic, mean and diatolic blood pressure) was measured with two different technologies: radial artery catheter and Nexfin. Bland-Altman and error grid analyses were performed to evaluate the accuracy and clinical concordance between devices. RESULTS: From March 2022 to November 2022, we included 50 patients, mostly ASA 3 (60%) and required a cerebral embolization (94%) under general anaesthesia (96%). Error grid analysis showed that 99% of non-invasive ABP measures obtained with the Nexfin were located in the risk zone A or B. However, 65.7% of hypertension events and 41% of hypotensive events were respectively not detected by Nexfin. Compared to the artery catheter, a significant relationship was found for SAP (r2 = 0.78) and MAP (r2 = 0.80) with the Nexfin (p < 0.001). Bias and limits of agreement (LOA) were respectively 9.6 mmHg (- 15.6 to 34.8 mmHg) and - 0.8 mmHg (- 17.2 to 15.6 mmHg), for SAP and MAP. CONCLUSIONS: Nexfin is not strictly interchangeable with artery catheter for ABP measuring. Further studies are needed to define its clinical use during neuroradiological procedure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, registration number: NCT05283824.