2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.03.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Invasive central venous monitoring during hepatic resection: unnecessary for most patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Clinical experience has showed that hepatic venous pressure could be effectively ameliorated by controlling low central venous pressure, thereby controlling blood loss and promoting separation of the liver parenchymal [22,23]. Other studies have reported that dexmedetomidine is one of the commonly used sedative and analgesic drugs in clinical practice with a high safety and reliability profile [24,25]. It can effectively inhibit sympathetic excitability, protect liver and kidney function by improving arteriole diameter, minimize the degree of ischemic reperfusion injury, and improve impaired cognitive function in patients [26,27].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clinical experience has showed that hepatic venous pressure could be effectively ameliorated by controlling low central venous pressure, thereby controlling blood loss and promoting separation of the liver parenchymal [22,23]. Other studies have reported that dexmedetomidine is one of the commonly used sedative and analgesic drugs in clinical practice with a high safety and reliability profile [24,25]. It can effectively inhibit sympathetic excitability, protect liver and kidney function by improving arteriole diameter, minimize the degree of ischemic reperfusion injury, and improve impaired cognitive function in patients [26,27].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…were documented. Intraoperative cardiac gas embolism was recorded, and cardiac CO 2 gas embolism was graded into five classes based on the proportion of bubbles detected: class 0, no bubbles seen in multiple views; class 1, non-contiguous visible single bubbles (< 10/section); class 2, non-contiguous visible clusters of bubbles (< 10/section); class 3, continuous visible clusters of bubbles (> 20/section); and class 4, continuous clusters of bubbles (> 20/section) in the right heart system 7 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…74,75 However, select data including recent randomized trials have failed to support superiority of this approach over goal directed therapy or intraoperative visual or ultrasound-based assessment of volume status by the surgeon, leading to a movement away from invasive CVP monitoring without any noted consequence in meaningful clinical outcomes. [76][77][78] Alternative metrics such as stroke volume variation (SVV) can be used, particularly for minimally invasive surgery where CO 2 insufflation of the abdomen can alter cardiac preload. 79 Techniques of parenchymal transection and inflow control are important but are beyond the scope of this review.…”
Section: Intraoperative Principlesmentioning
confidence: 99%