Goal-directed fluid therapy to near-maximal SV guided by ED adds no extra value to the fluid therapy using zero balance and normal BW in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

No abstract

BackgroundPerioperative hypovolemia and fluid overload have effects on both complications following surgery and on patient survival. Therefore, the administration of intravenous fluids before, during, and after surgery at the right time and in the right amounts is of great importance. This review aims to analyze the literature concerning perioperative fluid therapy in abdominal surgery and to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.ResultsPreoperative oral or intravenous administration of carbohydrate containing fluids has been shown to improve postoperative well-being and muscular strength and to reduce insulin resistance. Hence, the intake of fluid (preferably containing carbohydrates) should be encouraged up to 2 h prior to surgery in order to avoid dehydration. Excessive intravenous fluid administration adds to tissue inflammation and edema formation, thereby compromising tissue healing.During major abdominal surgery a “zero-balance” intraoperative fluid strategy aims at avoiding fluid overload (and comparable to the so-called restrictive approach) as well as goal-directed fluid therapy (GDT). Both proved to significantly reduce postoperative complications when compared to “standard fluid therapy”. Trials comparing “restrictive” or zero-balance and GDT have shown equal results, as long as fluid overload is avoided in the GDT group as well (categorized as “zero-balance GDT”).It is possible that high-risk surgical patients, such as those undergoing acute surgery, may benefit from the continuous monitoring of circulatory status that the GDT provides. Data on this group of patients is not available at present, but trials are ongoing.ConclusionIn elective surgery, the zero-balance approach has shown to reduce postoperative complications and is easily applied for most patients. It is less expensive and simpler than the zero-balance GDT approach and therefore recommended in this review. In outpatient surgery, 1–2 L of balanced crystalloids reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting and improves well-being.

BACKGROUND: There are no adequately validated tools to evaluate symptoms or disease-specific health-related quality of life in hemorrhoidal disease. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess validity, reliability, and responsiveness of a symptom score of patient-reported pain, itching, bleeding, soiling, and prolapse (Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score). In addition, the study set out to assess reliability and responsiveness of an instrument to measure health-related quality of life in patients with hemorrhoids (Short Health ScaleHD), with 1 item in its 4 dimensions: symptom load, functional status, disease-specific worries, and general well-being. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional (validity and reliability) and longitudinal (responsiveness) study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a single center. PATIENTS: Cohort 1 included 295 patients with hemorrhoids to study validity and 60 patients with test–retest scores to study reliability. Cohort 2 included 128 and 121 patients operated for hemorrhoids to study responsiveness of the Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score and the Short Health ScaleHD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The study evaluated validity, reliability, and responsiveness. Patient-reported symptom load on a 7-point Likert scale was used as comparator, and receiver operating characteristics curve assessed discriminative validity. Interclass correlation assessed reliability. Receiver operating characteristics curve assessed responsiveness, meaning the ability to discriminate between patients with and without improvement after surgery. RESULTS: The Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score demonstrated the ability to discriminate between patients reporting high or low symptom load (area under the curve = 0.786 (95% CI, 0.725–0.848)). The Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score and the Short Health ScaleHD demonstrated adequate reliability and responsiveness, with interclass correlation of 0.822 (95% CI, 0.715–0.891) and 0.763 (95% CI, 0.634–0.851) and area under the curve of 0.843 (95% CI, 0.756–0.929) and 0.840 (95% CI, 0.752–0.929). LIMITATIONS: We had no gold standard comparator to assess validity and responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score is valid, reliable, and responsive and that the Short Health ScaleHD is reliable and responsive. Used together, these tools provide a good overview of symptoms and their impact on patient well-being. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A770.