Influence of stroke volume variation on fluid treatment and postoperative complications in thoracic surgery

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Fluid management in critically ill patients usually relies on increasing preload to augment cardiac output. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate whether stroke volume variation (SVV) can guide fluid therapy and reduce complications. Patients and methods: In this retrospective study, a total of 88 patients who underwent lobectomy were divided into two groups: group 1 (SVV, n=43) and group 2 (conventional or central venous pressure [CVP], n=45). Heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, SVV (only group 1), CVP (all patients), urea, creatinine, and hemoglobin levels before and after surgery, use of fluid, blood and inotropic agents, and postoperative complications were recorded retrospectively. Results: The mean age of the study population was 56.9±14.4 years and 75% of the patients were male. SVV was used in fluid therapy in 48.9% of the patients. The use of SVV resulted in an increased use of crystalloids and colloids with increased urine output per hour (p<0.05). Of patients in the SVV group and the CVP group, 44.1% and 51.1% developed at least one complication, respectively (p=0.531). The rate of respiratory complications including atelectasis, pneumonia, hypoxemia, and an increased production of secretions was 21% in the SVV group and 37.7% in the CVP group (p=0.104). The rate of complications and the length of hospital stay were comparable between the groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: Our study results showed that the use of SVV increased the use of crystalloids and colloids and favorably affected urine output per hour but did not reduce complications in thoracic surgery.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sahutoglu, C., Turksal, E., Kocabas, S., & Askar, F. Z. (2018). Influence of stroke volume variation on fluid treatment and postoperative complications in thoracic surgery. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, 14, 575–581. https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S154093

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free