The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effect of a Perioperative, Cardiac Output–Guided Hemodynamic Therapy Algorithm on Outcomes Following Major Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial and Systematic Review
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Small trials suggest that postoperative outcomes may be improved by the use of cardiac output monitoring to guide administration of intravenous fluid and inotropic drugs as part of a hemodynamic therapy algorithm. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a perioperative, cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: OPTIMISE was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, observer-blinded trial of 734 high-risk patients aged 50 years or older undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery at 17 acute care hospitals in the United Kingdom. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis were also conducted including randomized trials published from 1966 to February 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to a cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm for intravenous fluid and inotrope (dopexamine) infusion during and 6 hours following surgery (n=368) or to usual care (n=366). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of predefined 30-day moderate or major complications and mortality. Secondary outcomes were morbidity on day 7; infection, critical care-free days, and all-cause mortality at 30 days; all-cause mortality at 180 days; and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Baseline patient characteristics, clinical care, and volumes of intravenous fluid were similar between groups. Care was nonadherent to the allocated treatment for less than 10% of patients in each group. The primary outcome occurred in 36.6% of intervention and 43.4% of usual care participants (relative risk [RR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.71-1.01]; absolute risk reduction, 6.8% [95% CI, -0.3% to 13.9%]; P = .07). There was no significant difference between groups for any secondary outcomes. Five intervention patients (1.4%) experienced cardiovascular serious adverse events within 24 hours compared with none in the usual care group. Findings of the meta-analysis of 38 trials, including data from this study, suggest that the intervention is associated with fewer complications (intervention, 488/1548 [31.5%] vs control, 614/1476 [41.6%]; RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.71-0.83]) and a nonsignificant reduction in hospital, 28-day, or 30-day mortality (intervention, 159/3215 deaths [4.9%] vs control, 206/3160 deaths [6.5%]; RR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.67-1.01]) and mortality at longest follow-up (intervention, 267/3215 deaths [8.3%] vs control, 327/3160 deaths [10.3%]; RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.74-1.00]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a randomized trial of high-risk patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery, use of a cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm compared with usual care did not reduce a composite outcome of complications and 30-day mortality. However, inclusion of these data in an updated meta-analysis indicates that the intervention was associated with a reduction in complication rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN04386758.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Management of severe perioperative bleeding: Guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology
Kozek-Langenecker, S. A., Afshari, A., Albaladejo, P., Santullano, C. A. A., De Robertis, E., Filipescu, D. C., Fries, D., Görlinger, K., Haas, T., Imberger, G., et al. (2013) · European Journal of Anaesthesiology · doi:10.1097/eja.0b013e32835f4d5b · Cited by 909
Nguyen, T.-L., Collins, G. S., Spence, J., Daurès, J.-P., Devereaux, P. J., Landais, P., & Le Manach, Y. (2017) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0338-0 · Cited by 512
Age of patients undergoing surgery
Fowler, A. J., Abbott, T. E. F., Prowle, J., & Pearse, R. M. (2019) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.11148 · Cited by 417
Self-citationScott, M. J., Baldini, G., Fearon, K. C. H., Feldheiser, A., Feldman, L. S., Gan, T. J., Ljungqvist, O., Lobo, D. N., Rockall, T. A., Schricker, T., et al. (2015) · Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/aas.12601 · Cited by 398
Bihorac, A., Ozrazgat-Baslanti, T., Ebadi, A., Motaei, A., Madkour, M., Pardalos, P. M., Lipori, G., Hogan, W. R., Efron, P. A., Moore, F., et al. (2019) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000002706 · Cited by 377
Metadata
- Authors
- Pearse, R. M., Harrison, D. A., MacDonald, N., Gillies, M. A., Blunt, M., Ackland, G., Grocott, M. P. W., Ahern, A., Griggs, K., Scott, R., Hinds, C., & Rowan, K.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2014-06-04
- Volume
- 311
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 2181
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2010753973
- Cited by
- 862
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 89.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of a Perioperative, Cardiac Output–Guided Hemodynamic Therapy Algorithm on Outcomes Following Major Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial and Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2014.5305
- The paper
- Pearse, R. M., Harrison, D. A., MacDonald, N., Gillies, M. A., Blunt, M., Ackland, G., Grocott, M. P. W., Ahern, A., Griggs, K., Scott, R., Hinds, C., & Rowan, K. (2014). Effect of a Perioperative, Cardiac Output–Guided Hemodynamic Therapy Algorithm on Outcomes Following Major Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial and Systematic Review. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.5305
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.