ReviewSurgical neurology international2024
Intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy in neurosurgical patients: A systematic review.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Lactate levels during anesthesia in patients undergoing craniopharyngioma surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- The effect of intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy in patients under anesthesia for gastrointestinal surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Perioperative fluid management is critical in neurosurgery as over perfusion can lead to brain edema whereas under perfusion may lead to brain hypoperfusion or ischemia. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) in patients undergoing intracranial surgeries. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases and forward-backward citations for studies published between database inception and February 22, 2024. Randomized controlled trials where intraoperative GDFT was performed in neurosurgery and compared to the conventional regime were included in the study. GDFT was compared with the conventional regime as per primary outcomes - total intraoperative fluid requirement, serum lactate, hemodynamics, brain relaxation, urine output, serum biochemistry, and secondary outcomes - intensive care unit and hospital length of stay. The quality of evidence was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024518816). Results: Of 75 records identified, eight were eligible, the majority of which had a low to moderate risk of overall bias. In four studies, more fluid was given in the control group. No difference in postoperative lactate values was noted in 50% of studies. In the remaining 50%, lactate was more in the control group. Three out of four studies did not find any significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative hypotension, and four out of six studies did not find a significant difference in vasopressor requirement. The majority of studies did not show significant differences in urine output, brain relaxation, and length of stay between both groups. None found any difference in acid base status or electrolyte levels. Conclusion: GDFT, when compared to the conventional regime in neurosurgery, showed that the total volume of fluids administered was lesser in the GDFT group with no increase in serum lactate. There was no difference in the hemodynamics, urine output, brain relaxation, urine output, length of stay, and biochemical parameters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.