■目标导向液体治疗(GDFT)在神经外科患者的预后方面存在相互矛盾的证据。这项荟萃分析旨在比较GDFT和常规液体治疗对神经外科手术患者各种围手术期结局的影响。
■使用PubMed进行了全面的文献检索,EMBASE,Scopus,ProQuest,WebofScience,EBSCOhost,Cochrane和预打印服务器。在PROSPERO注册后,搜索一直进行到2023年10月16日。搜索策略包括与GDFT相关的术语,神经外科手术和围手术期结果。仅包括涉及成年人的随机对照试验,并将GDFT与标准/自由/传统/限制性液体治疗进行比较。这些研究评估了偏倚风险(RoB),根据风险比(RR)和均差(MD)对结局的汇总估计值进行测量.
■GDFT和常规液体治疗[95%置信区间(CI)的RR为1.10(0.69,1.75),两项研究,90名患者,使用Gradepro的证据确定性低]。GDFT减少了术后并发症[RR=0.67(0.54,0.82),六项研究,392名参与者]和重症监护病房(ICU)和住院时间[MD(95%CI)分别为-1.65(-3.02,-0.28)和-0.94(-1.47,-0.42),分别]具有高度的证据确定性。GDFT组肺部并发症显著降低[RR(95%CI)=0.55(0.38,0.79),七项研究,442名患者,证据的高度确定性]。其他成果,包括术中给予的总液体和失血量,GDFT和常规治疗组[MD(95%CI)为-303.87(-912.56,304.82)和-14.79(-49.05,19.46),分别]。
■围手术期GDFT不影响神经系统预后。GDFT组术后并发症、住院时间和ICU住院时间均显著减少。
UNASSIGNED: Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) has conflicting evidence regarding outcomes in neurosurgical patients. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the effect of GDFT and conventional fluid therapy on various perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures.
UNASSIGNED: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, Cochrane and preprint servers. The search was conducted up until 16 October 2023, following PROSPERO registration. The search strategy included terms related to GDFT, neurosurgery and perioperative outcomes. Only randomised controlled trials involving adult humans and comparing GDFT with standard/liberal/traditional/restricted fluid therapy were included. The studies were evaluated for risk of bias (RoB), and pooled estimates of the outcomes were measured in terms of risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD).
UNASSIGNED: No statistically significant difference was observed in neurological outcomes between GDFT and conventional fluid therapy [RR with 95% confidence interval (CI) was 1.10 (0.69, 1.75), two studies, 90 patients, low certainty of evidence using GRADEpro]. GDFT reduced postoperative complications [RR = 0.67 (0.54, 0.82), six studies, 392 participants] and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay [MD (95% CI) were -1.65 (-3.02, -0.28) and -0.94 (-1.47, -0.42), respectively] with high certainty of evidence. The pulmonary complications were significantly lower in the GDFT group [RR (95% CI) = 0.55 (0.38, 0.79), seven studies, 442 patients, high certainty of evidence]. Other outcomes, including total intraoperative fluids administered and blood loss, were comparable in GDFT and conventional therapy groups [MD (95% CI) were -303.87 (-912.56, 304.82) and -14.79 (-49.05, 19.46), respectively].
UNASSIGNED: The perioperative GDFT did not influence the neurological outcome. The postoperative complications and hospital and ICU stay were significantly reduced in the GDFT group.