Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University, PO 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J Clin Anesth. 2016 Dec;35:26-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.07.010. Epub 2016 Aug 4.
This article reviews if a restrictive fluid management policy reduces the complication rate if compared to liberal fluid management policy during elective surgery. The PubMed database was explored by 2 independent researchers. We used the following search terms: "Blood transfusion (MESH); transfusion need; fluid therapy (MESH); permissive hypotension; fluid management; resuscitation; restrictive fluid management; liberal fluid management; elective surgery; damage control resuscitation; surgical procedures, operative (MESH); wounds (MESH); injuries (MESH); surgery; trauma patients." A secondary search in the Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library revealed no additional results. We selected randomized controlled trials performed during elective surgeries. Patients were randomly assigned to a restrictive fluid management policy or to a liberal fluid management policy during elective surgery. The patient characteristics and the type of surgery varied. All but 3 studies reported American Society of Anaesthesiologists groups 1 to 3 as the inclusion criterion. The primary outcome of interest is total number of patients with a complication and the complication rate. Secondary outcome measures are infection rate, transfusion need, postoperative rebleeding, hospital stay, and renal function. In total, 1397 patients were analyzed (693 restrictive protocol, 704 liberal protocol). Meta-analysis showed that in the restrictive group as compared with the liberal group, fewer patients experienced a complication (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.78). The total complication rate (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.64), risk of infection (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79), and transfusion rate (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66-0.99) were also lower. The postoperative rebleeding did not differ in both groups: RR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.28-2.06). We conclude that compared with a liberal fluid policy, a restrictive fluid policy in elective surgery results in a 35% reduction in patients with a complication and should be advised as the preferred fluid management policy.
这篇文章回顾了在择期手术中,相比自由的液体管理策略,限制液体管理策略是否会降低并发症发生率。两位独立的研究人员在 PubMed 数据库中进行了搜索。我们使用了以下搜索词:“输血(Mesh);输血需求;液体疗法(Mesh);允许性低血压;液体管理;复苏;限制液体管理;自由液体管理;择期手术;损伤控制性复苏;外科手术(Mesh);伤口(Mesh);损伤(Mesh);手术;创伤患者”。在 Medline、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 图书馆进行的二次搜索没有发现其他结果。我们选择了在择期手术中进行的随机对照试验。患者在择期手术中被随机分配到限制液体管理策略或自由液体管理策略组。患者特征和手术类型各不相同。除了 3 项研究外,所有研究均报告美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)1 至 3 级作为纳入标准。主要观察指标是发生并发症的患者总数和并发症发生率。次要观察指标是感染率、输血需求、术后再出血、住院时间和肾功能。共分析了 1397 例患者(限制组 693 例,自由组 704 例)。荟萃分析显示,与自由组相比,限制组发生并发症的患者较少(相对风险 [RR],0.65;95%置信区间 [CI],0.55-0.78)。总并发症发生率(RR,0.57;95%CI,0.52-0.64)、感染风险(RR,0.62;95%CI,0.48-0.79)和输血率(RR,0.81;95%CI,0.66-0.99)也较低。两组术后再出血无差异:RR,0.76(95%CI,0.28-2.06)。我们得出结论,与自由液体策略相比,择期手术中采用限制液体策略可使并发症患者减少 35%,因此应建议将其作为首选液体管理策略。