Goal-directed hemodynamic therapy (GDT) is used to prevent hypoperfusion resulting from surgery. The objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy and importance of perioperative GDT.
PUBMED, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar databases were searched until 17 June 2016 using the search terms: cardiac output, cardiac surgical procedures, hemodynamics, goal-directed therapy, and intraoperative. Randomized-controlled trials with pre-emptive hemodynamic intervention for cardiac surgical population versus standard hemodynamic therapy were included.
Nine studies were included with a total of 1148 patients. The overall analysis revealed no significant difference in the all-cause mortality (pooled peto OR =0.58, 95%CI =0.27-1.525, p = 0.164), duration of mechanical ventilation (pooled difference in mean= -1.48, 95%CI= -3.24 to 0.28, p = 0.099), or length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (pooled difference in mean= -9.10, 95%CI= -20.14 to 1.93, p = 0.106) between patients in the GDT and control groups. Patients in the GDP group were associated with shorter hospital stay than those in the control group (pooled difference in mean= -1.52, 95%CI= -2.31 to -0.73, p < 0.001).
GDT reduces the length of hospital stay compared with the standard of care. Further studies are necessary to continually assess the benefit of GDT following major surgery. Key Messages The results of this analysis revealed no significant difference between cardiac surgery patients receiving goal-directed hemodynamic therapy (GDT) or conventional fluid therapy in terms of the all-cause mortality, duration of mechanical intervention, and length of ICU-stay. The length of hospital stay was significantly reduced in patients treated with GDT compare to conventional fluid therapy. GDT may have limited benefit in reducing mortality; however, the association to shorter length of hospital stay may suggest that better hemodynamic balance can facilitate postoperative recovery.