Perioperative fluid and volume management: physiological basis, tools and strategies

Fluid and volume therapy is an important cornerstone of treating critically ill patients in the intensive care unit and in the operating room. New findings concerning the vascular barrier, its physiological functions, and its role regarding vascular leakage have lead to a new view of fluid and volume administration. Avoiding hypervolemia, as well as hypovolemia, plays a pivotal role when treating patients both perioperatively and in the intensive care unit. The various studies comparing restrictive vs. liberal fluid and volume management are not directly comparable, do not differ (in most instances) between colloid and crystalloid administration, and mostly do not refer to the vascular barrier's physiologic basis. In addition, very few studies have analyzed the use of advanced hemodynamic monitoring for volume management

The effects of hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (6%) on blood loss and use of blood products in major surgery: A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND: The effects of different types of hydroxylethyl starch (HES) on blood coagulation closely depend on their physicochemical properties. HES with lower molar substitution and a lower in vivo molecular weight interferes relatively little with hemostasis and therefore results in lower perioperative blood losses and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. To test this hypothesis, we analyzed pooled data from all available studies in major surgery comparing 6% HES 130/0.4 and 6% HES 200/0.5 from waxy maize starch. METHODS: Estimated blood loss, drainage loss, calculated blood loss, transfused blood product volumes, and coagulation variables were examined for 24 h after the start of surgery. Groups were compared using analysis of variance, evaluating several covariates. RESULTS: Four-hundred-forty-nine patients from seven clinical trials were analyzed, 228 received HES 130/0.4, and 221 received HES 200/0.5. For HES 130/0.4 patients, when compared to HES 200/0.5 patients, the estimated blood loss was reduced by 404 mL [P = 0.006], drainage loss was 272 mL less [P = 0.009], and calculated RBC loss was 149 mL less [P = 0.003]. RBC transfusion volumes were also lower for HES 130/0.4 by 137 mL [P = 0.004]. In the early postoperative phase, HES 130/0.4 was found to exert significantly less effect on measures of coagulation, especially activated partial thromboplastin time and von Willebrand factor (antigen and ristocetin cofactor), than HES 200/0.5. CONCLUSIONS: Blood loss and transfusion requirements can be significantly reduced in major surgery when using third generation HES 130/0.4 (Voluven®) compared to second generation waxy maize starch HES 200/0.5. Since HES 130/0.4 and HES 200/0.5 were found similar regarding volume efficacy in other studies, HES 130/0.4 is recommended in this clinical setting. © 2008 International Anesthesia Research Society.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe