Optimal Perioperative Fluid Therapy Associates with Fewer Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Abstract

Background: Optimal fluid management in pancreaticoduodenectomy patients remains contested. We aimed to examine the association between perioperative fluid administration and postoperative complications. Methods: We studied 168 pancreaticoduodenectomy patients operated in 2015 (n = 93) or 2017 (n = 75) at Helsinki University Hospital. In 2015, patients received intraoperative fluids following a goal-directed approach and, in 2017, according to anesthesiologist’s clinical practice (conventional fluid management). We analyzed the differences in perioperative fluid administration between the groups, specifically examining the occurrence of severe complications (Clavien–Dindo ≥ III), pancreatic fistulas, cardiovascular complications, and the length of hospital stay. Results: The goal-directed group received more intraoperative fluids than the conventional fluid management group (12.0 ml/kg/h vs. 8.3 ml/kg/h, p < 0.001). Urine output (770 ml vs. 575 ml, p = 0.004) and intraoperative fluid balance (9.4 ml/kg/h vs. 6.3 ml/kg/h, p < 0.001) were higher in the goal-directed group than in the conventional fluid management group. Severe surgical complications (19.4% vs. 38.7%, p = 0.009) as well as clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas (1.1% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.011) occurred more frequently in patients receiving conventional fluid management. Moreover, the conventional fluid management group experienced longer hospital stays (9.0 vs. 11.5 days, p = 0.02). Lower intraoperative fluid volume accompanying conventional fluid management was associated with a higher risk of severe postoperative complications compared with higher volume in the goal-directed group (odds ratio 2.58 (95% confidence interval 1.04–6.42), p = 0.041). Conclusions: The goal-directed group experienced severe complications less frequently. Our findings indicate that optimizing the intraoperative fluid administration benefits patients, while adopting a too-restrictive approach represents an inferior choice.