Goal-directed hemodynamic management in patients undergoing primary debulking gynaecological surgery: A matched-controlled precision medicine study

Andrea Russo, Paola Aceto, Domenico Luca Grieco, Gian Marco Anzellotti, Valter Perilli, Barbara Costantini, Bruno Romano Lamborghini, Giovanni Scambia, Liliana Sollazzi, Massimo Antonelli

Risultato della ricerca: Contributo in rivistaArticolo in rivista

6 Citazioni (Scopus)


Background: Usefulness of intraoperative goal-directed hemodynamic management (GDHM) for patients without comorbidities is debated. After clinical implementation of a pulse contour analysis-guided GDHM protocol, which foresees early vasopressor use for recruiting unstressed volume, we conducted a matched-controlled analysis to explore its impact on the amount of fluids intraoperatively administered to patients without comorbidities who underwent extended abdominal surgery for ovarian cancer. Methods: After 1:1 matching accounting for body mass index, oncologic disease severity and intraoperative blood losses, 22 patients treated according to this GDHM protocol were compared to a control group of 22 patients who had been managed according to the clinical decision of attending physicians, taken without advanced monitoring. Results are displayed as median[interquartile range]. Results: All analyzed patients underwent radical hysterectomy, bilateral adnexectomy, bowel resection, peritonectomy and extended pelvic/periaortic lymphadenectomy; median length of surgery was 517[480–605] min in patients receiving GDHM and 507[480–600] min in control group. Intraoperatively, patients undergoing GDHM received less fluids (crystalloids 2950[2700–3300] vs. 5150[4700–6000] mL, p < 0.001; colloids 100[50–200] vs. 750[500–1000] mL, p < 0.001) and showed a trend to more frequent vasopressor administration (32 vs 9%, p = 0.13). Greater intraoperative diuresis (540[480–620] mL vs. 450[400–500] mL, p = 0.007), lower blood lactates at surgery end (1.5[1.1–2] vs. 4.1[3.3–5] mmol/L, p < 0.001), shorter time to bowel function recovery (1 [1, 2] vs. 4 [3–5] days, p < 0.001) and hospital discharge (7 [6–8] vs 12 [9–16] days, p < 0.0001) were detected in patients receiving GDHM. Conclusions: In high-tumor load gynaecological patients without comorbidities who receive radical and prolonged surgery, intraoperative use of this novel GDHM protocol helped limit fluids administration with safety.
Lingua originaleEnglish
pagine (da-a)299-305
Numero di pagine7
RivistaGynecologic Oncology
Stato di pubblicazionePubblicato - 2018


  • Adult
  • Cardiac Output
  • Case-Control Studies
  • Crystalloid Solutions
  • Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures
  • Early Goal-Directed Therapy
  • Female
  • Fluid Therapy
  • Fluid-therapy
  • Genital Neoplasms, Female
  • Hemodynamic monitoring
  • Hemodynamics
  • Humans
  • Intraoperative Care
  • Isotonic Solutions
  • Middle Aged
  • Monitoring, Physiologic
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Oncology
  • Patient-centered care
  • Perioperative management
  • Personalized medicine
  • Pilot Projects
  • Precision Medicine
  • Stroke Volume


Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'Goal-directed hemodynamic management in patients undergoing primary debulking gynaecological surgery: A matched-controlled precision medicine study'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.

Cita questo