↓ Skip to main content

Stroke volume variation to guide fluid therapy: is it suitable for high-risk surgical patients? A terminated randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Perioperative Medicine, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#37 of 270)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Stroke volume variation to guide fluid therapy: is it suitable for high-risk surgical patients? A terminated randomized controlled trial
Published in
Perioperative Medicine, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13741-015-0016-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ib Jammer, Mari Tuovila, Atle Ulvik

Abstract

Perioperative goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) may improve outcome after high-risk surgery. Minimal invasive measurement of stroke volume variation (SVV) has been recommended to guide fluid therapy. We intended to study how perioperative GDFT with arterial-based continuous SVV monitoring influences postoperative complications in a high-risk surgical population. From February 1st 2012, all ASA 3 and 4 patients undergoing abdominal surgery in two university hospitals were assessed for randomization into a control group or GDFT group. An arterial-line cardiac output monitor was used to measure SVV, and fluid was given after an algorithm in the intervention group. Restrictions of the method excluded patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, patients with atrial fibrillation and patients with severe mitral/aortal stenosis. To detect a decrease in number of complication from 40 % in the control group to 20 % in the GDFT group, n = 164 patients were needed (power 80 %, alpha 0.05, two-sided test). To include the needed amount of patients, the study was estimated to last for 2 years. After 1 year, 30 patients were included and the study was halted due to slow inclusion rate. Of 732 high-risk patients scheduled for abdominal surgery, 391 were screened for randomization. Of those, n = 249 (64 %) were excluded because a laparoscopic technique was preferred and n = 95 (24 %) due to atrial fibrillation. Our study was stopped due to a slow inclusion rate. Methodological restrictions of the arterial-line cardiac output monitor excluded the majority of patients. This leaves the question if this method is appropriate to guide fluid therapy in high-risk surgical patients. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01473446.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 25%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 84%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Unknown 3 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 25 September 2015.
All research outputs
#2,953,623
of 25,292,646 outputs
Outputs from Perioperative Medicine
#37
of 270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,936
of 270,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perioperative Medicine
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,646 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 270 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 270,203 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.