| Title |
Pleth variability index-directed fluid management in abdominal surgery under combined general and epidural anesthesia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10877-014-9567-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yinan Yu, Jing Dong, Zifeng Xu, Hao Shen, Jijian Zheng |
| Abstract |
Pleth variability index (PVI), a noninvasive dynamic indicator of fluid responsiveness has been demonstrated to be useful in the management of the patients with goal directed fluid therapy under general anesthesia, but whether PVI can be used to optimize fluid management under combined general and epidural anesthesia (GEN-EPI) remains to be elucidated. The aim of our study was to explore the impact of PVI as a goal-directed fluid therapy parameter on the tissue perfusion for patients with GEN-EPI. Thirty ASA I-II patients scheduled for major abdominal surgeries under GEN-EPI were randomized into PVI-directed fluid management group (PVI group) and non PVI-directed fluid management group (control group). 2 mL/kg/h crystalloid fluid infusion was maintained in PVI group, once PVI > 13 %, a 250 mL colloid or crystalloid was rapidly infused. 4-8 mL/kg/h crystalloid fluid infusion was maintained in control group, and quick fluid infusion was initiated if mean arterial blood pressure (BP) < 65 mmHg. Small doses of norepinephrine were given to keep mean arterial BP above 65 mmHg as needed in both groups. Perioperative lactate levels, hemodynamic changes were recorded individually. The total amount of intraoperative fluids, the amount of crystalloid fluid and the first hour blood lactate levels during surgery were significantly lower in PVI than control group, P < 0.05. PVI-based goal-directed fluid management can reduce the intraoperative fluid amount and blood lactate levels in patients under GEN-EPI, especially the crystalloid. Furthermore, the first hour following GEN-EPI might be the critical period for anesthesiologist to optimize the fluid management. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 25% |
| Unknown | 17 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 39% |
| Psychology | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#7,442,740
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#201
of 665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,884
of 224,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 224,447 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.