Home > DARE Reviews > Haemodynamic goal-directed therapy in...
  • We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews.

Haemodynamic goal-directed therapy in cardiac and vascular surgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Review published: 2012.

Bibliographic details: Giglio M, Dalfino L, Puntillo F, Rubino G, Marucci M, Brienza N.  Haemodynamic goal-directed therapy in cardiac and vascular surgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery 2012; 15(5): 878-887. [PMC free article: PMC3480598] [PubMed: 22833509]


In cardiovascular surgery, reduced organ perfusion and oxygen delivery contribute to increased postoperative morbidity and prolonged intensive care unit stay. Goal-directed therapy (GDT), a perioperative haemodynamic strategy aiming to increase cardiac output, is helpful in preventing postoperative complications, but studies in the context of cardiovascular surgery have produced conflicting results. The purpose of the present meta-analysis is to determine the effects of perioperative haemodynamic goal-directed therapy on mortality and morbidity in cardiac and vascular surgery. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and the DARE databases were searched until July 2011. Randomized controlled trials reporting on adult cardiac or vascular surgical patients managed with perioperative GDT or according to routine haemodynamic practice were included. Primary outcome measures were mortality and morbidity. Data synthesis was obtained by using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) by a random effects model. An OR <1 favoured GDT. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by Q and I(2) statistics. Eleven articles (five cardiac surgery and six vascular procedures), enrolling a total sample of 1179 patients, were included in the analysis. As compared with routine haemodynamic practice, perioperative GDT did not reduce mortality in either cardiac or vascular surgery (pooled OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.37-2.02; statistical power 64%). GDT significantly reduced the number of cardiac patients with complications (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.18-0.63; P = 0.0006), but no effect was observed in vascular patients (OR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.45-1.56; P = 0.58). Perioperative GDT prevents postoperative complications in cardiac surgery patients, while it has no effect in vascular surgery. The different characteristics and comorbidities of the population enrolled could explain these conflicting results. More trials conforming to the characteristics of low-risk-of-bias studies and enrolling a larger and well-defined population of patients are needed to better clarify the effect of GDT in the specific setting of cardiovascular surgery.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2013 University of York.

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...