↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Influence of stroke volume variation on fluid treatment and postoperative complications in thoracic surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
Title
Influence of stroke volume variation on fluid treatment and postoperative complications in thoracic surgery
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, March 2018
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s154093
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cengiz Sahutoglu, Erbil Turksal, Seden Kocabas, Fatma Zekiye Askar

Abstract

Fluid management in critically ill patients usually relies on increasing preload to augment cardiac output. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate whether stroke volume variation (SVV) can guide fluid therapy and reduce complications. In this retrospective study, a total of 88 patients who underwent lobectomy were divided into two groups: group 1 (SVV, n=43) and group 2 (conventional or central venous pressure [CVP], n=45). Heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, SVV (only group 1), CVP (all patients), urea, creatinine, and hemoglobin levels before and after surgery, use of fluid, blood and inotropic agents, and postoperative complications were recorded retrospectively. The mean age of the study population was 56.9±14.4 years and 75% of the patients were male. SVV was used in fluid therapy in 48.9% of the patients. The use of SVV resulted in an increased use of crystalloids and colloids with increased urine output per hour (p<0.05). Of patients in the SVV group and the CVP group, 44.1% and 51.1% developed at least one complication, respectively (p=0.531). The rate of respiratory complications including atelectasis, pneumonia, hypoxemia, and an increased production of secretions was 21% in the SVV group and 37.7% in the CVP group (p=0.104). The rate of complications and the length of hospital stay were comparable between the groups (p>0.05). Our study results showed that the use of SVV increased the use of crystalloids and colloids and favorably affected urine output per hour but did not reduce complications in thoracic surgery.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 50%
Other 2 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 75%
Unspecified 1 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 April 2018.
All research outputs
#11,339,358
of 12,749,777 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#874
of 945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,373
of 273,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#27
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,749,777 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 945 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.