Effect of goal-directed therapy on outcome after esophageal surgery: A quality improvement study

PLoS One. 2017 Mar 2;12(3):e0172806. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172806. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

Background: Goal-directed therapy (GDT) can reduce postoperative complications in high-risk surgery patients. It is uncertain whether GDT has the same benefits in patients undergoing esophageal surgery. Goal of this Quality Improvement study was to evaluate the effects of a stroke volume guided GDT on post-operative outcome.

Methods and findings: We compared the postoperative outcome of patients undergoing esophagectomy before (99 patients) and after (100 patients) implementation of GDT. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with a complication (56% vs. 54%, p = 0.82), hospital stay and mortality. The incidence of prolonged ICU stay (>48 hours) was reduced (28% vs. 12, p = .005) in patients treated with GDT. Secondary analysis of complication rate showed a decrease in pneumonia (29 vs. 15%, p = .02), mediastinal abscesses (12 vs. 3%, p = .02), and gastric tube necrosis (5% vs. 0%, p = .03) in patients treated with GDT. Patients in the GDT group received significantly less fluids but received more colloids.

Conclusions: The implementation of GDT during esophagectomy was not associated with reductions in overall morbidity, mortality and hospital length of stay. However, we observed a decrease in pneumonia, mediastinal abscesses, gastric tube necrosis, and ICU length of stay.

Publication types

  • Observational Study

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Anti-Infective Agents / pharmacology
  • Esophagectomy / adverse effects
  • Esophagus / surgery*
  • Female
  • Goals*
  • Guideline Adherence
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Postoperative Complications / therapy*
  • Quality Improvement*

Substances

  • Anti-Infective Agents

Grants and funding

This project was funded by Edwards Life Sciences LLC, Irvine CA, United States of America (contract was made, under name: quality improvement project, AMC). Funding was only for a part of the material costs (probes). EV1000 monitors were borrowed. The authors state that they had full control of the design of the study, methods used, outcome parameters and results, analysis of data and production of the written report.