Perioperative fluid management in gastrointestinal surgery is one of the key points to maintain sufficient blood perfusion and oxygen delivery for the organs, tissues and cells. Different strategies of fluid management have different influences on postoperative complications and mortality. After systematic review of related literature, we found that compared with the conventional liberal liquid administration, restricted liquid management and goal directed liquid management would benefit patients in general. With the guidance of cardiac output (CO), stroke volume (SV), stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV) and pulse perfusion variation index (PVI), which can dynamically monitor the reactivity to volume, individualized goal-directed liquid management was more likely to maintain the perioperative hemodynamic stability, guarantee adequate tissue and organ blood perfusion and oxygen delivery, reduce perioperative complications, and shorten the postoperative hospital stay. In addition, the potential risk of tissue hypoperfusion caused by restricted liquid management should draw the clinicians' attention. More researches are needed to explore the right timing, the appropriate type of liquid and the reasonable amount of liquid to maintain the best functional state of tissues and organs perioperatively.
Blood Pressure ; Digestive System Surgical Procedures ; Fluid Therapy ; Humans ; Perioperative Care ; Postoperative Complications ; Postoperative Period ; Stroke Volume

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the short-term outcomes and perioperative safety of proximally extended resection for locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

METHODSFrom colorectal cancer database in The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, a cohort of patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy(1.8-2.0 Gy per day, 25-28 fractions, concurrent fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) followed by curative sphincter-preserving surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer between May 2016 and June 2017 were retrospectively identified. Exclusion criteria were synchronous colon cancer, intraoperatively confirmed distal metastasis, multiple visceral resection, and emergency operation. Thirty-one patients underwent proximal extended resection and two were excluded for incomplete extended resection, then 29 patients were enrolled as the extended group. Using propensity scores matching with 1/1 ration, 29 locally advanced rectal cancer patients who underwent conventional resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy at the same time were matched as the conventional group. Clinical data of two groups were analyzed, and the baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes were compared using the t test, χtest, or Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTSTwo groups were well balanced with respect to the baseline characteristics after propensity score matching. As compared with conventional group, patients in extended group had longer surgical specimen [(18.8±5.1) cm vs.(11.6±3.4) cm, t=6.314, P=0.000] and longer proximal resection margin [(14.8±5.5) cm vs.(8.2±3.0) cm, t=5.725, P=0.000], but also had longer total operating time [(322.4±100.7) min vs.(254.6±70.3) min, t=2.975, P=0.004] and more intraoperative blood loss [100(225) ml vs. 100(50) ml, Z=-2.403, P=0.016]. No significant differences were observed in the length of distal resection margin, ratio of positive resection margin, number of retrieved lymph node, time of analgesic use, time of draining tube use, time to first flatus, time to first oral diet, and postoperative hospital stay. During the perioperative period of 30 days, the morbidity of complication in extended group and conventional group was 17.2%(5/29) and 34.5% (10/29), respectively (P=0.134).

CONCLUSIONProximally extended resection is a radical and safe surgical alternative for locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, which can potentially reduce the risk of anastomosis complication.