» Articles » PMID: 39687427

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Goal-directed Haemodynamic Therapy Algorithms During Surgery for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection

Abstract

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication. Goal-directed haemodynamic therapy (GDHT) may help to prevent SSI, but recommendations for its use initially have been set at conditional because of low-certainty evidence at the time. An updated systematic review with SSI as the primary endpoint has not been performed since 2011, and important new evidence has emerged. We assessed the influence of GDHT on SSI and other postoperative outcomes.

Methods: We searched Ovid/MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase.com), and Cochrane library from inception up to September 2024 for randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of any GDHT algorithm to conventional fluid therapy on SSI incidence in adult patients undergoing surgery and analysed eligible data using random effects. We conducted several subgroup analyses, including the risk of bias (RoB), and a trial sequential analysis (TSA). We evaluated the certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022277535.

Findings: We found 75 studies that met the inclusion criteria with an incidence of 1,478 SSI among 13,010 patients (11.4%). The incidence of SSI was reduced from 13.3% in the conventional fluid therapy to 9.4% after GDHT (absolute risk reduction 3.9%); pooled relative risk 0.71 (95% CI 0.62-0.81). Subgroup analysis for the low RoB studies revealed comparable results. Meta-regression indicated no strong evidence for individual subgroup effects. In the TSA, the cumulative z-line crossed the boundary for effect.

Interpretation: High-certainty evidence indicates that GDHT reduces the risk of SSI when compared to conventional fluid therapy in adults undergoing surgery. New studies are unlikely to change this outcome. These findings justify a stronger recommendation for the use of GDHT.

Funding: Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.

References
1.
Junghans T, Neuss H, Strohauer M, Raue W, Haase O, Schink T . Hypovolemia after traditional preoperative care in patients undergoing colonic surgery is underrepresented in conventional hemodynamic monitoring. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2005; 21(7):693-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-005-0065-6. View

2.
Dalfino L, Giglio M, Puntillo F, Marucci M, Brienza N . Haemodynamic goal-directed therapy and postoperative infections: earlier is better. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2011; 15(3):R154. PMC: 3219028. DOI: 10.1186/cc10284. View

3.
Bisgaard J, Gilsaa T, Ronholm E, Toft P . Haemodynamic optimisation in lower limb arterial surgery: room for improvement?. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012; 57(2):189-98. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2012.02755.x. View

4.
Forget P, Lois F, De Kock M . Goal-directed fluid management based on the pulse oximeter-derived pleth variability index reduces lactate levels and improves fluid management. Anesth Analg. 2010; 111(4):910-4. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181eb624f. View

5.
Kumar L, Kanneganti Y, Rajan S . Outcomes of implementation of enhanced goal directed therapy in high-risk patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Indian J Anaesth. 2015; 59(4):228-33. PMC: 4408651. DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.155000. View