Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 898

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

Hamilton, Mark A., Cecconi, Maurizio, Rhodes, Andrew·2011·Anesthesia & Analgesia

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181eeaae5

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 898

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.