TY - JOUR
T1 - Restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery
AU - Myles, P. S.
AU - Bellomo, R.
AU - Corcoran, T.
AU - Forbes, A.
AU - Peyton, P.
AU - Story, D.
AU - Christophi, C.
AU - Leslie, K.
AU - McGuinness, S.
AU - Parke, R.
AU - Serpell, J.
AU - Chan, M. T.V.
AU - Painter, T.
AU - McCluskey, S.
AU - Minto, G.
AU - Wallace, S.
PY - 2018/6/14
Y1 - 2018/6/14
N2 - BACKGROUND Guidelines to promote the early recovery of patients undergoing major surgery recommend a restrictive intravenous-fluid strategy for abdominal surgery. However, the supporting evidence is limited, and there is concern about impaired organ perfusion. METHODS In a pragmatic, international trial, we randomly assigned 3000 patients who had an increased risk of complications while undergoing major abdominal surgery to receive a restrictive or liberal intravenous-fluid regimen during and up to 24 hours after surgery. The primary outcome was disability-free survival at 1 year. Key secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury at 30 days, renal-replacement therapy at 90 days, and a composite of septic complications, surgical-site infection, or death. RESULTS During and up to 24 hours after surgery, 1490 patients in the restrictive fluid group had a median intravenous-fluid intake of 3.7 liters (interquartile range, 2.9 to 4.9), as compared with 6.1 liters (interquartile range, 5.0 to 7.4) in 1493 patients in the liberal fluid group (P<0.001). The rate of disability-free survival at 1 year was 81.9% in the restrictive fluid group and 82.3% in the liberal fluid group (hazard ratio for death or disability, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.88 to 1.24; P = 0.61). The rate of acute kidney injury was 8.6% in the restrictive fluid group and 5.0% in the liberal fluid group (P<0.001). The rate of septic complications or death was 21.8% in the restrictive fluid group and 19.8% in the liberal fluid group (P = 0.19); rates of surgical-site infection (16.5% vs. 13.6%, P = 0.02) and renal-replacement therapy (0.9% vs. 0.3%, P = 0.048) were higher in the restrictive fluid group, but the between-group difference was not significant after adjustment for multiple testing. CONCLUSIONS Among patients at increased risk for complications during major abdominal surgery, a restrictive fluid regimen was not associated with a higher rate of disability-free survival than a liberal fluid regimen and was associated with a higher rate of acute kidney injury. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; RELIEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01424150.).
AB - BACKGROUND Guidelines to promote the early recovery of patients undergoing major surgery recommend a restrictive intravenous-fluid strategy for abdominal surgery. However, the supporting evidence is limited, and there is concern about impaired organ perfusion. METHODS In a pragmatic, international trial, we randomly assigned 3000 patients who had an increased risk of complications while undergoing major abdominal surgery to receive a restrictive or liberal intravenous-fluid regimen during and up to 24 hours after surgery. The primary outcome was disability-free survival at 1 year. Key secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury at 30 days, renal-replacement therapy at 90 days, and a composite of septic complications, surgical-site infection, or death. RESULTS During and up to 24 hours after surgery, 1490 patients in the restrictive fluid group had a median intravenous-fluid intake of 3.7 liters (interquartile range, 2.9 to 4.9), as compared with 6.1 liters (interquartile range, 5.0 to 7.4) in 1493 patients in the liberal fluid group (P<0.001). The rate of disability-free survival at 1 year was 81.9% in the restrictive fluid group and 82.3% in the liberal fluid group (hazard ratio for death or disability, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.88 to 1.24; P = 0.61). The rate of acute kidney injury was 8.6% in the restrictive fluid group and 5.0% in the liberal fluid group (P<0.001). The rate of septic complications or death was 21.8% in the restrictive fluid group and 19.8% in the liberal fluid group (P = 0.19); rates of surgical-site infection (16.5% vs. 13.6%, P = 0.02) and renal-replacement therapy (0.9% vs. 0.3%, P = 0.048) were higher in the restrictive fluid group, but the between-group difference was not significant after adjustment for multiple testing. CONCLUSIONS Among patients at increased risk for complications during major abdominal surgery, a restrictive fluid regimen was not associated with a higher rate of disability-free survival than a liberal fluid regimen and was associated with a higher rate of acute kidney injury. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; RELIEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01424150.).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046893710&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1056/NEJMoa1801601
DO - 10.1056/NEJMoa1801601
M3 - Article
C2 - 29742967
AN - SCOPUS:85046893710
SN - 0028-4793
VL - 378
SP - 2263
EP - 2274
JO - New England Journal of Medicine
JF - New England Journal of Medicine
IS - 24
ER -