Web site designed and maintained by Chris Cairns  © SICS EBM Group 2004                                  

Up

 

Use of pulmonary artery catheter guided goal-directed therapy in high risk surgical patients offers no clinical advantage or disadvantage in terms of mortality.

PAFC-guided goal-directed therapy in elderly ASA III or IV patients undergoing elective or urgent major surgery offers no advantage over conventional therapy but is not associated with increased mortality. This study also demonstrates the feasibility of large randomised trials of pulmonary artery catheters.

Level of Evidence: 1++

 

Citation/s:
Sandham J D, Hull R D, Brant RF et al. A Randomised , Controlled Trial of the Use of Pulmonary-Artery Catheters in High Risk Surgical Patients. New Engl J Med 2003: 348(1); 5-14.


Lead author's name and fax: James Dean Sandham. sandham@ucalgary.ca

 

Three-part Clinical Question: Does goal-directed therapy guided by pulmonary artery catheterisation in elderly ASA III or IV patients undergoing elective or urgent major surgery improve outcomes compared with standard care.


Search Terms: Journal club

 

The Study:
Single-blinded concealed randomised controlled trial with intention-to-treat.
The Study Patients: All patients >60 yrs age, ASA III or IV and undergoing major elective or urgent abdominal, thoracic, vascular or hip # surgery were eligible. Of 3803 eligible patients, 1994 (52.4%) randomised. The remainder either refused consent, were not referred or no ICU bed was available. The patients were recruited from 1990 - 1999. The 2 randomised groups showed no significant differences in baseline characteristics although the patients not enrolled tended to be female, older, ASA III and had a lower incidence of MI and angina.


Control group (N = 997; 997 analysed): The standard care group were managed without the use of a PAFC or goals to direct therapy. Measurement of central venous pressure was allowed. All patients were admitted to ICU postoperatively.


Experimental group (N = 997; 997 analysed): The experimental group had PAFC's sited preoperatively and an attempt was made to achieve the following goals: DO2I 550-600 ml/min/m2, CI 3.5-4.5 l/min/m2, MAP ³ 70mmHg, PCWP ³18 mmHg, HR 27%. Fluid loading, inotropic therapy, vasodilators, vasopressors and blood transfusion were suggested therapy. CI and DO2I were met in 18.6% and 21% pre-op and 79 and 62.9% respectively post-op.

The Evidence:

Outcome

Time to Outcome

CER

EER

RRR

ARR

NNT

Death

Hospital

0.077

0.078

-1%

-0.001

-1000

95% Confidence Intervals:

-32% to 29%

-0.024 to 0.022

NNT = 44 to INF; NNH = 41 to INF

Death

12 months

0.155

0.163

-5%

-0.008

-125

95% Confidence Intervals:

-26% to 16%

-0.040 to 0.024

NNT = 41 to INF; NNH = 25 to INF

 

Comments:


The authors are very careful to point out that this is a study looking at a specific therapeutic approach in a specific group of patients undergoing specific procedures followed by a stay in ICU and is not generalisable to other instances where PAFC's are used. In this sense it is as much a study of preoptimisation as of the use of PAFC's (although only about 20% of patients in the PAFC group attained DO2I and CI goals preoperatively).

More patients in the PAFC group received inotropes, vasodilators, antihypertensives, packed cells & colloids.

Morbidity data were also evaluated. Length of hospital stay (10d), MI, CCF, SVT, VT, sepsis, pneumonia, wound infection, hepatic and renal insufficiency (pre-defined categories) were similar between the 2 groups. The only significant difference between the 2 groups was in incidence of pulmonary embolism (0 vs. 8 in PAFC, p=0.004).

The use of PAFC's for these indications is rare in the UK outside specific surgical areas (e.g. cardiac & hepatic surgery).

 

Appraised by: Murray Geddes, Intensive Care Unit, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh.; 18 February 2003
Email: mgeddes@btinternet.com


Kill or Update By: February 2008

 

Printer friendly format