Skip to content

Assisted Fluid Management vs Manual GDFT

Assisted Versus Manual Goal Directed Fluid Therapy in Major Abdominal Surgery

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03141411
Enrollment
46
Registered
2017-05-05
Start date
2017-05-10
Completion date
2017-08-24
Last updated
2017-08-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Surgery

Brief summary

Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) strategies based on cardiac output (CO) optimization have been shown to benefit moderate- to high-risk surgery patients and have recently been recommended by professional societies in the UK, in France, and in Europe. However, despite the growing evidence, these strategies are often not implemented in current practice. One of the reasons for this lack of implementation is that GDFT strategies, like any other complex clinical protocol, require significant provider attention and vigilance for consistent implementation and it is well known that even under study conditions protocol compliance rates are often not greater than 50%. To overpass this problem, our CO monitoring devices (EV1000, Edwards Lifesciences) have now an incorporated assisted fluid management software. This software determines fluid responsiveness by estimating the predicted change in stroke volume and suggests to the anesthesiologist when fluid is required .

Detailed description

The aim of this study was to assess an assisted fluid management strategy in a moderate-to-high risk surgical cohort and compare that cohort to matched patients who received manual GDFT. Our hypothesis was that the assisted fluid management system would result in higher mean percentage time spent during surgery with a SVV \< 13%

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Erasme University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* All patients undergoing major abdominal surgery and requiring a CO monitoring for fluid management

Exclusion criteria

Emergency surgery Arrhythmia (e.g. atrial fibrillation) Aortic regurgitation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
percentage time spent with SVV < 13%intraoperative perioddefined as preload independent state

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
amount of fluid administeredintraoperative periodamount of cristalloid ( baseline ) AND fluid boluses (250 ml) received
amount of vasopressors requiredintraoperative periodamount of ephedrine, phenylephrine and norepinephrine
fluid balanceintraoperative periodFLUID IN - FLUID OUT
incidence of major and minor complicationsuntil 30 days post surgerysee study protocol NCT03039946 for the description of these complications
PACU/ICU and hospital length of stayuntil 30 days post surgerytime spent in ICU and PACU

Countries

Belgium

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 6, 2026