Conventional Fluid Management Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Management In Elective Colorectal Surgery
Abdelrahman, A., Badran, A., Zagloul, A., Elbadrawy, R. (2022). Conventional Fluid Management Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Management In Elective Colorectal Surgery. EKB Journal Management System, 89(2), 6716-6725. doi: 10.21608/ejhm.2022.270766
Abdelrahman Mahmoud Abdelrahman; Aboelnour Elmorsy Badran; Amgad Abdelmageed Zagloul; Rania Elmohamady Elbadrawy. "Conventional Fluid Management Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Management In Elective Colorectal Surgery". EKB Journal Management System, 89, 2, 2022, 6716-6725. doi: 10.21608/ejhm.2022.270766
Abdelrahman, A., Badran, A., Zagloul, A., Elbadrawy, R. (2022). 'Conventional Fluid Management Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Management In Elective Colorectal Surgery', EKB Journal Management System, 89(2), pp. 6716-6725. doi: 10.21608/ejhm.2022.270766
Abdelrahman, A., Badran, A., Zagloul, A., Elbadrawy, R. Conventional Fluid Management Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Management In Elective Colorectal Surgery. EKB Journal Management System, 2022; 89(2): 6716-6725. doi: 10.21608/ejhm.2022.270766

Conventional Fluid Management Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Management In Elective Colorectal Surgery

The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine
Article 97, Volume 89, Issue 2, October 2022, Page 6716-6725  XML PDF (887.94 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/ejhm.2022.270766
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Abdelrahman Mahmoud Abdelrahman; Aboelnour Elmorsy Badran; Amgad Abdelmageed Zagloul; Rania Elmohamady Elbadrawy email orcid
Rania E Elbadrawy
Abstract
Background: Optimum perioperative fluid therapy is important to improve the outcome of surgical patients, so the assessment of a patient’s volume status accurately is an important goal for the anesthesiologist to achieve hemodynamic stability and adequate tissue oxygenation.
Objective: This study compared intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) versus conventional fluid therapy (CVFT) using noninvasive electrical cardiometry with measuring serum lactate, serum creatinine levels, stroke volume optimization, and postoperative complication.
Methods: One hundred patients ASA I -II, both sexes, aged 21-65 years scheduled for elective colorectal surgery were randomized into 2 groups (50 subjects each). GDFT group used Stroke volume optimization, and CVFT used the conventional method of fluid administration. Hemodynamic variables, amount of fluid given, serum lactate, serum creatinine, and postoperative complication were noted.
Results: Serum lactate levels were insignificant intra& postoperative except at 6 hrs. postoperative was higher in GDFT 1,79±0.21 than CVFT 1.68±0.23with p value=0.02 but still within normal limits. CVFT received significantly more crystalloids 2750(1500-4000) than GDFT 2250 (1000-3350) with p value=0.002, whereas GDFT received more colloids 350(200-1000) than CVFT 250(0-1000) with p value=0.024. Total fluid received were higher in CVFT 3550(2000-5600) than GDFT 2750(1500-5000) with p-value=0.005.
Conclusions: GDFT results in a decreased total volume of crystalloids and fluid given to patients. However, both groups didn’t alter organ perfusion inspite of serum lactate being higher in GDFT and with no differences in postoperative complications in both groups.
 
Keywords
Fluid therapy; Conventional; Goal-directed; Cardiometry; Colorectal surgery
Statistics
Article View: 178
PDF Download: 240