Hipotensión arterial postoperatoria: el enemigo inadvertido / Postoperative arterial hypotension: The unnoticed enemy

La hipotensión postoperatoria es un problema de salud frecuentemente subestimado, asociado a una elevada morbimortalidad y a un mayor uso de recursos sanitarios. También plantea importantes retos clínicos, tecnológicos y humanos para la asistencia sanitaria. Al tratarse de un factor de riesgo modificable y evitable, este documento pretende aumentar su visibilidad, definiendo su impacto clínico y los retos tecnológicos que conlleva la optimización de su manejo, teniendo en cuenta aspectos clínico-tecnológicos, humanísticos y económicos.(AU)

Postoperative hypotension is a frequently underestimated health problem associated with high morbidity and mortality and increased use of health care resources. It also poses significant clinical, technological, and human challenges for healthcare. As it is a modifiable and avoidable risk factor, this document aims to increase its visibility, defining its clinical impact and the technological challenges involved in optimizing its management, taking clinical-technological, humanistic, and economic aspects into account.(AU)

Revisión crítica de las recomendaciones sobre fluidoterapia perioperatoria y monitorización hemodinámica de Recuperación intensificada en cirugía del adulto (RICA): Declaración de posición del Grupo de Trabajo de Fluidoterapia y Monitorización hemodinámica de la Sección de Hemostasia, Medicina transfusional y Fluidoterapia (SHTF) de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (SEDAR) / A critical review of the Perioperative Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring recommendations of the Enhanced Recovery of the Adult Pathway (RICA): A position statement of the Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section (SHTF) of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SEDAR)

En un esfuerzo por estandarizar el manejo perioperatorio y mejorar los resultados posoperatorios de los pacientes adultos sometidos a cirugía, el Ministerio de Sanidad, a través del Grupo Español de Rehabilitación Multimodal (GERM) y el Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud, en colaboración con diversas sociedades científicas españolas, y sobre la base de la evidencia disponible, publicó en 2021 la guía Recuperación intensificada en cirugía del adulto (RICA). Dicho documento incluye 12 medidas perioperatorias relacionadas con la fluidoterapia y la monitorización hemodinámica. La administración de fluidos y la monitorización hemodinámica no son sencillas, pero están directamente relacionadas con los resultados de los pacientes. El Subcomité de Fluidoterapia y monitorización hemodinámica de la Sección de Hemostasia, Medicina transfusional y Fluidoterapia (SHTF) de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (SEDAR) ha analizado dichas recomendaciones, concluyendo que deberían ser revisadas, ya que no siguen la metodología adecuada. (AU)

In an effort to standardize perioperative management and improve postoperative outcomes of adult patients undergoing surgery, the Ministry of Health, through the Spanish Multimodal Rehabilitation Group (GERM), and the Aragonese Institute of Health Sciences, in collaboration with multiple Spanish scientific societies and based on the available evidence, published in 2021 the Spanish Intensified Adult Recovery (RICA) guideline. This document includes 12 perioperative measures related to fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring. Fluid administration and hemodynamic monitoring are not straightforward but are directly related to postoperative patient outcomes. The Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section (SHTF) of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SEDAR) has reviewed these recommendations and concluded that they should be revised as they do not follow an adequate methodology. (AU)

A critical review of the perioperative fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring recommendations of the Enhanced Recovery of the Adult Pathway (RICA): A position statement of the fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section (SHTF) of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SEDAR).

In an effort to standardize perioperative management and improve postoperative outcomes of adult patients undergoing surgery, the Ministry of Health, through the Spanish Multimodal Rehabilitation Group (GERM), and the Aragonese Institute of Health Sciences, in collaboration with multiple Spanish scientific societies and based on the available evidence, published in 2021 the Spanish Intensified Adult Recovery (RICA) guideline. This document includes 12 perioperative measures related to fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring. Fluid administration and hemodynamic monitoring are not straightforward but are directly related to postoperative patient outcomes. The Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section (SHTF) of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SEDAR) has reviewed these recommendations and concluded that they should be revised as they do not follow an adequate methodology.

Postoperative arterial hypotension: the unnoticed enemy.

Postoperative hypotension is a frequently underestimated health problem associated with high morbidity and mortality and increased use of health care resources. It also poses significant clinical, technological, and human challenges for healthcare. As it is a modifiable and avoidable risk factor, this document aims to increase its visibility, defining its clinical impact and the technological challenges involved in optimizing its management, taking clinical-technological, humanistic, and economic aspects into account.

Prueba de volumen en el quirófano: subestudio planificado del estudio observacional Fluid Day / Fluid challenges in operating room: A planned sub study of the Fluid Day observational study

Antecedentes: La administración intraoperatoria de fluidos es una intervención ubicua en los pacientes quirúrgicos. Pero la administración inadecuada de fluidos puede llevar a malos resultados postoperatorios. La prueba de volumen (PV), dentro o fuera de la denominada fluidoterapia guiada por objetivos, permite probar el sistema cardiovascular y la necesidad de administración adicional de fluidos. Nuestro objetivo primario fue evaluar el modo en que el anestesiólogo realiza la PV en el quirófano en términos de tipo, volumen, variables utilizadas para impulsar la PV, y comparar la proporción de pacientes que recibieron administración adicional de fluidos basada en la respuesta a la PV. Métodos: Se trata de un subestudio planificado de un estudio observacional realizado en 131 centros en España, en pacientes sometidos a cirugía. Resultados: En el estudio se incluyeron y analizaron 396 pacientes. La cantidad media [rango intercuartílico] de fluidos administrados durante la PV fue de 250ml (200-400). La principal indicación de la PV fue el descenso de la presión arterial sistólica en 246 casos (62,2%). La segunda indicación fue el descenso de la presión arterial media (54,4%). Se utilizó el gasto cardiaco en 30 pacientes (7,58%), y la variación del volumen sistólico en 29 de entre 385 casos (7,32%). La respuesta a la PV inicial no tuvo impacto a la hora de prescribir administración adicional de fluidos. Conclusiones: La indicación y la evaluación actuales de la PV en los pacientes quirúrgicos son altamente variables. La predicción de la receptividad a los fluidos no se utiliza rutinariamente, evaluándose a menudo las variables no adecuadas para valorar la respuesta hemodinámica a la PV, pudiendo causar efectos perjudiciales.(AU)

Background: Intraoperative fluid administration is a ubiquitous intervention in surgical patients. But inadequate fluid administration may lead to poor postoperative outcomes. Fluid challenges (FCs), in or outside the so-called goal-directed fluid therapy, allows testing the cardiovascular system and the need for further fluid administration. Our primary aim was to evaluate how anesthesiologists conduct FCs in the operating room in terms of type, volume, variables used to trigger a FC and to compare the proportion of patients receiving further fluid administration based on the response to the FC. Methods: This was a planned substudy of an observational study conducted in 131 centers in Spain in patients undergoing surgery. Results: A total of 396 patients were enrolled and analyzed in the study. The median [interquartile range] amount of fluid given during a FC was 250mL (200-400). The main indication for FC was a decrease in systolic arterial pressure in 246 cases (62.2%). The second was a decrease in mean arterial pressure (54.4%). Cardiac output was used in 30 patients (7.58%), while stroke volume variation in 29 of 385 cases (7.32%). The response to the initial FC did not have an impact when prescribing further fluid administration. Conclusions: The current indication and evaluation of FC in surgical patients is highly variable. Prediction of fluid responsiveness is not routinely used, and inappropriate variables are frequently evaluated for assessing the hemodynamic response to FC, which may result in deleterious effects.(AU)

Prioridades de investigación en términos de fluidoterapia perioperatoria y monitorización hemodinámica: encuesta de consenso Delphi del Subcomité de Fluidoterapia y Monitorización hemodinámica de la Sección de Hemostasia, Medicina Transfusional y Fluidoterapia (SHTF) de la Sociedad española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (SEDAR) / Research priorities in perioperative fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring: A Delphi Consensus Survey from the Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section (SHTF) of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SEDAR)

Antecedentes: La investigación sobre fluidoterapia y monitorización hemodinámica perioperatorias es difícil y costosa. Los objetivos del presente estudio fueron resumir y priorizar estas cuestiones, en orden de importancia investigadora. Métodos: Cuestionario estructurado electrónico Delphi a lo largo de tres rondas entre 30 expertos en fluidoterapia y monitorización hemodinámica identificados a través del Subcomité de Fluidoterapia y Monitorización hemodinámica de la Sección de Hemostasia, Medicina Transfusional y Fluidoterapia de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación. Resultados: Se identificaron 77 cuestiones, que se clasificaron en orden de priorización. Las cuestiones se categorizaron en temas de cristaloides, coloides, monitorización hemodinámica y otros. Se categorizaron 31 cuestiones como de prioridad investigadora esencial, para determinar si los algoritmos de optimización hemodinámica intraoperatorios basados en el índice de predicción de hipotensión invasivo o no invasivo frente a otras estrategias de manejo podrían reducir la incidencia de complicaciones postoperatorias, así como si el uso de biomarcadores del estrés renal junto con un protocolo de fluidoterapia dirigido por objetivos podría reducir la estancia hospitalaria y la incidencia de insuficiencia renal aguda en pacientes adultos sometidos a cirugía no cardiaca, lográndose el más alto consenso. Conclusiones: El Subcomité de Fluidoterapia y Monitorización hemodinámica de la Sección de Hemostasia, Medicina Transfusional y Fluidoterapia de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación utilizará estos resultados para la realización de investigación.(AU)

Background: Research on perioperative fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring is difficult and expensive. The objectives of the present study were to summarize and prioritize these issues, in order of research importance. research importance. Methods: Structured electronic Delphi questionnaire over three rounds among 30 experts in fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring identified through the Subcommittee on Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation. Results: 77 issues were identified, which were ranked in order of prioritization. The were categorized into crystalloid, colloid, hemodynamic monitoring and others. and others. Thirty-one issues were categorized as of essential research priority, to determine whether intraoperative hemodynamic optimization algorithms based on the index of invasive or noninvasive hypotension prediction index versus other management strategies could reduce the incidence of postoperative reduce the incidence of postoperative complications, as well as whether the use of biomarkers of renal stress in conjunction biomarkers of renal stress in conjunction with a goal-directed fluid therapy protocol could reduce hospital stay and the hospital stay and the incidence of acute renal failure in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, and whether the non-cardiac surgery, achieving the highest consensus. Conclusions: The Subcommittee on Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring of the Section of Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation will use these results for further research.(AU)

Research priorities in perioperative fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring: A Delphi Consensus Survey from the Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section (SHTF) of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SEDAR).

BACKGROUND: Research in fluid therapy and perioperative hemodynamic monitoring is difficult and expensive. The objectives of this study were to summarize these topics and to prioritize these topics in order of research importance. METHODS: Electronic structured Delphi questionnaire over three rounds among 30 experts in fluid therapy and hemodynamic monitoring identified through the Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care. RESULTS: 77 topics were identified and ranked in order of prioritization. Topics were categorized into themes of crystalloids, colloids, hemodynamic monitoring and others. 31 topics were ranked as essential research priority. To determine whether intraoperative hemodynamic optimization algorithms based on the invasive or noninvasive Hypotension Prediction Index versus other management strategies could decrease the incidence of postoperative complications. As well as whether the use of renal stress biomarkers together with a goal-directed fluid therapy protocol could reduce hospital stay and the incidence of acute kidney injury in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, reached the highest consensus. CONCLUSIONS: The Fluid Therapy and Hemodynamic Monitoring Subcommittee of the Hemostasis, Transfusion Medicine and Fluid Therapy Section of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Critical Care will use these results to carry out the research.

Fluid challenges in operating room: A planned sub study of the Fluid Day observational study.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative fluid administration is a ubiquitous intervention in surgical patients. But inadequate fluid administration may lead to poor postoperative outcomes. Fluid challenges (FCs), in or outside the so-called goal-directed fluid therapy, allows testing the cardiovascular system and the need for further fluid administration. Our primary aim was to evaluate how anesthesiologists conduct FCs in the operating room in terms of type, volume, variables used to trigger a FC and to compare the proportion of patients receiving further fluid administration based on the response to the FC. METHODS: This was a planned substudy of an observational study conducted in 131 centres in Spain in patients undergoing surgery. RESULTS: A total of 396 patients were enrolled and analysed in the study. The median [interquartile range] amount of fluid given during a FC was 250ml (200-400). The main indication for FC was a decrease in systolic arterial pressure in 246 cases (62.2%). The second was a decrease in mean arterial pressure (54.4%). Cardiac output was used in 30 patients (7.58%), while stroke volume variation in 29 of 385 cases (7.32%). The response to the initial FC did not have an impact when prescribing further fluid administration. CONCLUSIONS: The current indication and evaluation of FC in surgical patients is highly variable. Prediction of fluid responsiveness is not routinely used, and inappropriate variables are frequently evaluated for assessing the hemodynamic response to FC, which may result in deleterious effects.

Coloides perioperatorios: de la teoría a la práctica / Perioperative colloids: From theory to practice

Introducción: La administración intravenosa de fluidos constituye un elemento fundamental en la reanimación de pacientes con hipovolemia. Las guías clínicas restringen el uso de coloides en favor de los cristaloides. Actualmente, no conocemos con exactitud cuál es la práctica clínica habitual al respecto durante el periodo perioperatorio. El objetivo del presente estudio es describir el uso perioperatorio de coloides y analizar las posibles causas que motivan su utilización. Material y métodos: Estudio observacional, transversal, multicéntrico. Subanálisis del estudio Fluid Day. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes mayores de 18 años sometidos a cirugía durante las 24h de los 2 días del estudio (18 y 20 de febrero de 2019). Se registraron datos demográficos, comorbilidades, datos referentes al acto anestésico y el procedimiento quirúrgico, fluidos administrados, sangrado perioperatorio y tipo de monitorización utilizado durante el periodo perioperatorio. Resultados: Se analizaron 5.928 casos. Un total de 542 pacientes (9,1%) recibieron algún tipo de coloides, siendo el hidroxietilalmidón el más utilizado (5,1%). Los pacientes que recibieron coloides tuvieron intervenciones más prolongadas (150 [90-255] vs. 75 [45-120] min), fueron intervenidos de urgencia (13,7 vs. 7,5%) y se clasificaron como de alto riesgo (22 vs. 4,8%) más frecuentemente. Su recuperación inmediata mayoritariamente transcurrió en unidades de críticos (45,1 vs.15,8%). Los pacientes que presentaron una hemorragia menor de 500ml recibieron coloides en un 5,9% frente al 45,9% cuando se superó esta cifra. Los pacientes que recibieron coloides presentaban anemia más frecuentemente: 29,4 vs. 16,3%. La administración de coloides supuso un mayor riesgo de transfusión (OR 15,7). La monitorización avanzada también aumentó la probabilidad de administrar coloides (OR 9,43). Conclusiones: En nuestro medio y en condiciones de práctica clínica habitual, la utilización de los coloides es escasa...(AU)

Introduction: Fluid administration is the cornerstone in hypovolemic patient's reanimation. Clinical guidelines restrict colloid administration favouring crystalloids. Currently, we don’t know exactly which is the daily clinical practice during the perioperative period. The objective of this study is to describe perioperative use of colloids analysing possible reasons aiming to use them. Material and Methods: Prospective, cross-section, national, multicentre observational study. Fluid Day sub-study. We enrolled all patient's older than 18 years old who underwent surgery during the 24h of the 2-days study (February, 2019, 18th and 20th). We registered demographic data, comorbidities, anaesthetic and surgical procedure data, fluids administered, perioperative bleeding and monitoring type used during the perioperative period. Results: A total of 5928 cases were analysed and 542 patients (9.1%) received any type of colloids, being hydroxiethyl-starch the most frequently used (5.1%). Patients receiving colloids suffered more longing surgery (150 [90-255] vs. 75 [45-120] min), were urgently operated (13.7 vs. 7.5%) and were more frequent classified as high risk (22 vs. 4.8%). Their recovery was mostly in critical care units (45.1 vs.15.8%). Patients with bleeding less than 500mL received colloids in a percentage of 5.9 versus 45.9% when this figure was overcome. Patients who received colloids were anaemic more frequently: 29.4 vs. 16.3%. Colloids administration had a higher risk for transfusion (OR 15.7). Advanced monitoring also increased the risk for receiving colloids (OR 9.43). Conclusions: In our environment with routine clinical practice, colloids administration is limited and close linked to perioperative bleeding.(AU)

Perioperative colloids: From theory to practice.

INTRODUCTION: Fluid administration is the cornerstone in hypovolemic patient's reanimation. Clinical guidelines restrict colloid administration favouring crystalloids. Currently, we don't know exactly which is the daily clinical practice during the perioperative period. The objective of this study is to describe perioperative use of colloids analysing possible reasons aiming to use them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, cross-section, national, multicentre observational study. Fluid Day sub-study. We enrolled all patient's older than 18 years old who underwent surgery during the 24 h of the 2-days study (February, 2019, 18th and 20th). We registered demographic data, comorbidities, anaesthetic and surgical procedure data, fluids administered, perioperative bleeding and monitoring type used during the perioperative period. RESULTS: A total of 5928 cases were analysed and 542 patients (9.1%) received any type of colloids, being hydroxiethyl-starch the most frequently used (5.1%). Patients receiving colloids suffered more longing surgery (150 [90-255] vs. 75 [45-120] min), were urgently operated (13.7 vs. 7.5%) and were more frequent classified as high risk (22 vs. 4.8%). Their recovery was mostly in critical care units (45.1 vs.15.8%). Patients with bleeding less than 500 ml received colloids in a percentage of 5.9 versus 45.9% when this figure was overcome. Patients who received colloids were anaemic more frequently: 29.4 vs. 16.3%. Colloids administration had a higher risk for transfusion (OR 15.7). Advanced monitoring also increased the risk for receiving colloids (OR 9.43). CONCLUSIONS: In our environment with routine clinical practice, colloids administration is limited and close linked to perioperative bleeding.

Association between preoperative baseline pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity and acute renal failure and mortality following colorectal surgery. A single-centre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Elevated pulse wave velocity is a haemodynamic parameter considered to be a risk factor for the development of cardiovascular alterations, while pulse pressure is a predictor of cardiovascular complications and development of acute renal failure after both cardiac and non-cardiac surgery. Our objective was to determine whether baseline pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity are associated with renal failure and 30-day mortality following colorectal surgery. METHODS: Retrospective observational study. A total of 816 adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery were evaluated by performing multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine whether baseline pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity were independently associated with complications, specifically renal failure and 30-day postoperative mortality, and whether pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity thresholds correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: Baseline pulse pressure was 56.00 mmHg (45.00;68.00) and estimated pulse wave velocity was 13.16 m/s (10.76;14.85). Baseline pulse pressure was not associated with acute renal failure or mortality in the univariate model. Baseline estimated pulse wave velocity was not associated with complications, acute renal failure, or mortality. An estimated pulse wave velocity of 13.78 m/s significantly predicted acute renal failure (AUC 0.654 [0.588-0.720]) and mortality (AUC 0.698 [0.600-0.796]). CONCLUSIONS: Neither pulse pressure nor preoperative baseline estimated pulse wave velocity were associated with acute renal failure or postoperative mortality. The preoperative estimated pulse wave velocity threshold of 13.78 m/s predicted an increased risk of acute renal failure and postoperative mortality.

Intraoperative crystalloid utilization variability and association with postoperative outcomes: A post hoc analysis of two multicenter prospective cohort studies.

BACKGROUND: The optimal regimen for intravenous administration of intraoperative fluids remains unclear. Our goal was to analyze intraoperative crystalloid volume administration practices and their association with postoperative outcomes. METHODS: We extracted clinical data from two multicenter observational studies including adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery and total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). We analyzed the distribution of intraoperative fluid administration. Regression was performed using a general linear model to determine factors predictive of fluid administration. Patient outcomes and intraoperative crystalloid utilization were summarized for each surgical cohort. Regression models were developed to evaluate associations of high or low intraoperative crystalloid with the likelihood of increased postoperative complications, mainly acute kidney injury (AKI) and hospital length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: 7580 patients were included. The average adjusted intraoperative crystalloid infusion rate across all surgeries was to 7.9 (SD 4) mL/kg/h. The regression model strongly favored the type of surgery over other patient predictors. We found that high fluid volume was associated with 40% greater odds ratio (OR 1.40; 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.95, p = 0.044) of postoperative complications in patients undergoing THA, while we found no associations for the other types of surgeries, AKI and LOS CONCLUSIONS: A wide variability was observed in intraoperative crystalloid volume administration; however, this did not affect postoperative outcomes.

Association between preoperative baseline pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity and acute renal failure and mortality following colorectal surgery. A single-centre observational study. / Asociación entre la presión de pulso y la velocidad onda pulso estimada basal preoperatoria con las complicaciones postoperatorias, insuficiencia renal aguda y mortalidad tras cirugía colorrectal. Estudio unicéntrico observacional.

BACKGROUND: Elevated pulse wave velocity is a haemodynamic parameter considered to be a risk factor for the development of cardiovascular alterations, while pulse pressure is a predictor of cardiovascular complications and development of acute renal failure after both cardiac and non-cardiac surgery. Our objective was to determine whether baseline pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity are associated with renal failure and 30-day mortality following colorectal surgery. METHODS: Retrospective observational study. A total of 816 adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery were evaluated by performing multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine whether baseline pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity were independently associated with complications, specifically renal failure and 30-day postoperative mortality, and whether pulse pressure and estimated pulse wave velocity thresholds correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: Baseline pulse pressure was 56.00mmHg (45.00;68.00) and estimated pulse wave velocity was 13.16m/s (10.76;14.85). Baseline pulse pressure was not associated with acute renal failure or mortality in the univariate model. Baseline estimated pulse wave velocity was not associated with complications, acute renal failure, or mortality. An estimated pulse wave velocity of 13.78m/s significantly predicted acute renal failure (AUC 0.654 [0.588-0.720]) and mortality (AUC 0.698 [0.600-0.796]). CONCLUSIONS: Neither pulse pressure nor preoperative baseline estimated pulse wave velocity were associated with acute renal failure or postoperative mortality. The preoperative estimated pulse wave velocity threshold of 13.78m/s predicted an increased risk of acute renal failure and postoperative mortality.