The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Use of Preemptive Hemodynamic Intervention to Improve Postoperative Outcomes in Moderate and High-Risk Surgical Patients
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complications from major surgery are undesirable, common, and potentially avoidable. The long-term consequences of short-term surgical complications have recently been recognized to have a profound influence on longevity and quality of life in survivors. In the past 30 years, there have been a number of studies conducted attempting to reduce surgical mortality and morbidity by deliberately and preemptively manipulating perioperative hemodynamics. Early studies had a high control-group mortality rate and were criticized for this as being unrepresentative of current practice and raised opposition to its implementation as routine care. We performed this review to update this body of literature and to examine the effect of changes in current practice and quality of care to see whether the conclusions from previous quantitative analyses of this field remain valid. METHODS: Randomized clinical trials evaluating the use of preemptive hemodynamic intervention to improve surgical outcome were identified using multiple methods. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials register) were screened for potential trials, reference lists of identified trials were examined, and additional sources were sought from experts and industry representatives. Identified studies that fulfilled the entry criteria were examined in full and subjected to quantifiable analysis, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis where possible. RESULTS: There were 29 studies identified, 23 of which reported surgical complications. In total, the 29 trials involved 4805 patients with an overall mortality of 7.6%. The use of preemptive hemodynamic intervention significantly reduced mortality (pooled odds ratio [95% confidence interval] of 0.48 [0.33-0.78]; P = 0.0002) and surgical complications (odds ratio 0.43 [0.34-0.53]; P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis showed significant reductions in mortality for studies using a pulmonary artery catheter, supranormal resuscitation targets, studies using cardiac index or oxygen delivery as goals, and the use of fluids and inotropes as opposed to fluids alone. By contrast, there was a significant reduction in morbidity for each of the 4 subgroups analyzed. CONCLUSION: The use of a preemptive strategy of hemodynamic monitoring and coupled therapy reduces surgical mortality and morbidity.
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
Cites
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Cited by
Fluid challenges in intensive care: the FENICE study: A global inception cohort study
on behalf of the FENICE Investigators and the ESICM Trial Group, Cecconi, M., Hofer, C., Teboul, J.-L., Pettila, V., Wilkman, E., Molnar, Z., Della Rocca, G., Aldecoa, C., Artigas, A., et al. (2015) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3850-x · Cited by 573
Self-citationFour phases of intravenous fluid therapy: a conceptual model
Hoste, E. A., Maitland, K., Brudney, C. S., Mehta, R., Vincent, J.-L., Yates, D., Kellum, J. A., Mythen, M. G., & Shaw, A. D. (2014) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1093/bja/aeu300 · Cited by 357
Cecconi, M., Corredor, C., Arulkumaran, N., Abuella, G., Ball, J., Grounds, R. M., Hamilton, M., & Rhodes, A. (2012) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc11823 · Cited by 339
Self-citationLess invasive hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill patients
Teboul, J.-L., Saugel, B., Cecconi, M., De Backer, D., Hofer, C. K., Monnet, X., Perel, A., Pinsky, M. R., Reuter, D. A., Rhodes, A., et al. (2016) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4375-7 · Cited by 328
Self-citationCannesson, M., Pestel, G., Ricks, C., Hoeft, A., & Perel, A. (2011) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc10364 · Cited by 310
Metadata
- Authors
- Hamilton, M. A., Cecconi, M., & Rhodes, A.
- Venue
- Anesthesia & Analgesia
- Published
- 2011-06
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1392-1402
- ISSN
- 0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2170312276
- Cited by
- 898
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Use of Preemptive Hemodynamic Intervention to Improve Postoperative Outcomes in Moderate and High-Risk Surgical Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1213/ane.0b013e3181eeaae5
- The paper
- Hamilton, M. A., Cecconi, M., & Rhodes, A. (2011). A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Use of Preemptive Hemodynamic Intervention to Improve Postoperative Outcomes in Moderate and High-Risk Surgical Patients. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0b013e3181eeaae5
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.