Central venous pressure and liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Michael J Hughes, Nicholas T Ventham, Ewen M Harrison, Stephen J Wigmore
Author Information
  1. Michael J Hughes: Department of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
  2. Nicholas T Ventham: Department of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
  3. Ewen M Harrison: Department of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
  4. Stephen J Wigmore: Department of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A liver resection under low central venous pressure (CVP) has become standard practice; however, the benefits beyond a reduction in blood loss are not well reported. Moreover, the precise method to achieve CVP reduction has not been established. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RTCs) was performed to assess the effects of CVP on clinical outcome and to identify the optimum method of CVP reduction.
METHODS: EMBASE, Medline, PubMed and the Cochrane database were searched for trials comparing low CVP surgery with controls. The primary outcome was post-operative complications within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion rates and length of stay (LOS). Sub-group analysis was performed to assess the CVP reduction method on the outcome.
RESULTS: Eight trials were identified. No difference was observed in the morbidity rate between the high CVP and control groups [odds ratio (OR) = 0.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66, 1.40) P = 0.84, I(2) = 0%]. EBL [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -308.63 ml (95% CI -474.67, -142.58) P = < 0.001, I(2) = 73%] and blood transfusion rates [OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.44, 0.97) P = 0.040, I(2) = 37%] were significantly lower in the low CVP groups. Neither anaesthetic nor surgical methods of CVP reduction were associated with a reduced post-operative morbidity.
CONCLUSION: Low CVP surgery is associated with a reduction in EBL; however, this does not translate into an improvement in post-operative morbidity. The optimum method of CVP reduction has not been identified.

References

  1. Br J Surg. 1998 Aug;85(8):1058-60 [PMID: 9717995]
  2. HPB (Oxford). 2012 Sep;14(9):611-8 [PMID: 22882198]
  3. Dig Surg. 2007;24(4):259-64 [PMID: 17657150]
  4. HPB (Oxford). 2014 Aug;16(8):699-706 [PMID: 24661306]
  5. HPB Surg. 2009;2009:271986 [PMID: 20029637]
  6. Am J Transplant. 2010 Apr;10(4):877-82 [PMID: 20420642]
  7. Ann Surg. 2005 Apr;241(4):582-90 [PMID: 15798459]
  8. Clin Nutr. 2012 Dec;31(6):783-800 [PMID: 23099039]
  9. Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2005 Jun;18(2):367-77 [PMID: 16438011]
  10. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011 Oct;55(9):1106-12 [PMID: 22092208]
  11. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:13 [PMID: 15840177]
  12. Liver Transpl. 2007 Apr;13(4):537-42 [PMID: 17394151]
  13. World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan 7;20(1):303-9 [PMID: 24415886]
  14. J Med Assoc Thai. 2013 Jan;96(1):58-63 [PMID: 23720979]
  15. Surgery. 2004 Jan;135(1):67-73 [PMID: 14694302]
  16. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013 Aug;17(8):1414-21 [PMID: 23715650]
  17. Ann Surg. 2009 Jun;249(6):995-1002 [PMID: 19474679]
  18. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005 Dec;18(6):547-51 [PMID: 16306849]
  19. J Clin Anesth. 1997 May;9(3):251-7 [PMID: 9172037]
  20. Ann Surg. 2002 Oct;236(4):397-406; discussion 406-7 [PMID: 12368667]
  21. World J Surg. 2008 Jun;32(6):1082-7 [PMID: 18246387]
  22. HPB (Oxford). 2013 Apr;15(4):245-51 [PMID: 23458424]
  23. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2013 Oct;12(5):520-4 [PMID: 24103283]
  24. Br J Surg. 2012 Jun;99(6):781-8 [PMID: 22389136]
  25. J Am Coll Surg. 1998 Dec;187(6):620-5 [PMID: 9849736]
  26. Ann Surg. 2004 Oct;240(4):698-708; discussion 708-10 [PMID: 15383797]
  27. World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb 14;12(6):935-9 [PMID: 16521223]
  28. HPB (Oxford). 2002;4(1):5-10 [PMID: 18333146]
  29. Br J Surg. 1996 Jan;83(1):121-4 [PMID: 8653335]
  30. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009 May;53(5):601-6 [PMID: 19419353]
  31. Ann Surg. 2011 Jun;253(6):1102-10 [PMID: 21412143]
  32. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007 Oct;33(8):1036-41 [PMID: 17369004]
  33. J Am Coll Surg. 2008 Jun;206(6):1184-92 [PMID: 18501817]
  34. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000 Mar-Apr;4(2):162-7 [PMID: 10675239]
  35. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(5):CD007338 [PMID: 22592720]
  36. Am J Surg. 2011 Jan;201(1):62-9 [PMID: 20409520]
  37. Transplant Proc. 2003 Dec;35(8):2970-3 [PMID: 14697952]
  38. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097 [PMID: 19621072]

MeSH Term

Blood Loss, Surgical
Blood Transfusion
Central Venous Pressure
Hepatectomy
Humans
Hypotension, Controlled

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0CVP=0reductionbloodmethodlowtrialsoutcomepost-operativeEBLmorbidity95%CIP2livervenouspressurehoweverlosssystematicreviewmeta-analysisperformedassessoptimumsurgerytransfusionratesidentifieddifferencegroupsassociatedBACKGROUND:resectioncentralbecomestandardpracticebenefitsbeyondwellreportedMoreoverpreciseachieveestablishedrandomizedcontrolledRTCseffectsclinicalidentifyMETHODS:EMBASEMedlinePubMedCochranedatabasesearchedcomparingcontrolsprimarycomplicationswithin30daysSecondaryoutcomesincludedestimatedlengthstayLOSSub-groupanalysisRESULTS:Eightobservedratehighcontrol[oddsratioOR96confidenceinterval66140840%][weightedmeanWMD-30863ml-47467-14258<00173%][OR65449704037%]significantlylowerNeitheranaestheticsurgicalmethodsreducedCONCLUSION:LowtranslateimprovementCentralresection:

Similar Articles

Cited By