Tapia Blanca, Garrido Elena, Cebrian Jose Luis, Del Castillo Jose Luis, Gonzalez Javier, Losantos Itsaso, Gilsanz Fernando
Anesthesia and Intensive Care Department, University Hospital La Paz, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28046 Madrid, Spain.
Anesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Wexner Medical Center, 410 W 10th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Mar 27;13(7):1545. doi: 10.3390/cancers13071545.
(1) Background: Surgical outcomes in free flap reconstruction of head and neck defects in cancer patients have improved steadily in recent years; however, correct anaesthesia management is also important. The aim of this study has been to show whether goal directed therapy can improve flap viability and morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. (2) Methods: we performed an observational case control study to analyse the impact of introducing a semi invasive device (Flo Trac) during anaesthesia management to optimize fluid management. Patients were divided into two groups: one received goal directed therapy (GDT group) and the other conventional fluid management (CFM group). Our objective was to compare surgical outcomes, complications, fluid management, and length of stay between groups. (3) Results: We recruited 140 patients. There were no differences between groups in terms of demographic data. Statistically significant differences were observed in colloid infusion (GDT 53.1% vs. CFM 74.1%, = 0.023) and also in intraoperative and postoperative infusion of crystalloids (CFM 5.72 (4.2, 6.98) vs. GDT 3.04 (2.29, 4.11), < 0.001), which reached statistical significance. Vasopressor infusion in the operating room (CFM 25.5% vs. GDT 74.5%, < 0.001) and during the first postoperative 24h (CFM 40.6% vs. GDT 75%, > 0.001) also differed. Differences were also found in length of stay in the intensive care unit (hours: CFM 58.5 (40, 110) vs. GDT 40.5 (36, 64.5), = 0.005) and in the hospital (days: CFM 15.5 (12, 26) vs. GDT 12 (10, 19), = 0.009). We found differences in free flap necrosis rate (CMF 37.1% vs. GDT 13.6%, = 0.003). One-year survival did not differ between groups (CFM 95.6% vs. GDT 86.8%, = 0.08). (4) Conclusions: Goal directed therapy in oncological head and neck surgery improves outcomes in free flap reconstruction and also reduces length of stay in the hospital and intensive care unit, with their corresponding costs. It also appears to reduce morbidity, although these differences were not significant. Our results have shown that optimizing intraoperative fluid therapy improves postoperative morbidity and mortality.
(1) 背景:近年来,癌症患者头颈部缺损游离皮瓣重建的手术效果稳步改善;然而,正确的麻醉管理也很重要。本研究的目的是表明目标导向治疗是否能改善手术患者的皮瓣存活率、发病率和死亡率。(2) 方法:我们进行了一项观察性病例对照研究,以分析在麻醉管理期间引入一种半侵入性设备(Flo Trac)以优化液体管理的影响。患者分为两组:一组接受目标导向治疗(GDT组),另一组接受传统液体管理(CFM组)。我们的目标是比较两组之间的手术效果、并发症、液体管理和住院时间。(3) 结果:我们招募了140名患者。两组在人口统计学数据方面没有差异。在胶体输注方面观察到统计学上的显著差异(GDT组为53.1%,CFM组为74.1%,P = 0.023),在术中及术后晶体液输注方面也有差异(CFM组为5.72(4.2,6.98),GDT组为3.04(2.29,4.11),P < 0.001),差异具有统计学意义。手术室血管加压药输注情况(CFM组为25.5%,GDT组为74.5%,P < 0.001)以及术后第一个24小时内的情况(CFM组为40.6%,GDT组为75%,P > 0.001)也有所不同。在重症监护病房的住院时间(小时:CFM组为58.5(40,110),GDT组为40.5(36,64.5),P = 0.005)和住院时间(天:CFM组为15.5(12,26),GDT组为12(10,19),P = 0.009)方面也发现了差异。我们发现游离皮瓣坏死率存在差异(CMF组为37.1%,GDT组为13.6%,P = 0.003)。两组的一年生存率没有差异(CFM组为95.6%,GDT组为86.8%,P = 0.08)。(4) 结论:肿瘤性头颈部手术中的目标导向治疗可改善游离皮瓣重建的效果,并减少在医院和重症监护病房的住院时间及其相应费用。似乎还能降低发病率,尽管这些差异不显著。我们的结果表明,优化术中液体治疗可改善术后发病率和死亡率。