Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2025

Modified Laparoscopic Anatomic Hepatectomy: Two-Surgeon Technique Combined with the Simple Extracorporeal Pringle Maneuver
Published on: June 16, 2023
Restricted Versus Liberal Versus Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy for Non-vascular Abdominal Surgery: A Network
Timothy Xianyi Yang1, Adrian Y Tan1, Wesley H Leung1
1Department of Anaesthesiology and Operating Theatre Services, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong, HKG.
Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDT) is most effective for reducing complications and length of stay in adult surgical patients. Liberal fluid therapy (LFT) showed the most effectiveness in reducing mortality rates, though evidence quality is low.
Area of Science:
- Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
- Surgical Critical Care
- Evidence-Based Medicine
Background:
- Optimal perioperative fluid management is critical for surgical outcomes.
- Over- or under-fluid administration can lead to significant complications.
- Existing fluid therapy strategies (liberal, restrictive, goal-directed) lack a clear consensus on superiority.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness of liberal fluid therapy (LFT), restrictive fluid therapy (RFT), and goal-directed fluid therapy (GDT) in adult surgical patients undergoing non-vascular abdominal surgery.
- To identify the optimal fluid management strategy for improving perioperative outcomes.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) including node-splitting and meta-regression.
- Literature search across major databases (PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science).
- Inclusion of 102 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 12,100 adult patients; exclusion of pediatric, obstetric, and cardiac surgery trials.
Main Results:
- GDT utilizing FloTrac was most effective for reducing length of stay (LOS) and wound complications.
- GDT utilizing pulse pressure variation excelled in reducing overall complication rates, renal, respiratory, and cardiac complications.
- LFT was most effective for reducing mortality, while GDT with esophageal Doppler reduced anastomotic leaks. Evidence quality was generally low to very low.
Conclusions:
- Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDT) demonstrates superior effectiveness in preventing various complications (excluding mortality) compared to standard, liberal, or restricted fluid therapy.
- Specific GDT monitoring tools (FloTrac, pulse pressure variation, esophageal Doppler) offer distinct advantages for different outcomes.
- Despite promising results for GDT, the overall low quality of evidence necessitates cautious interpretation and further high-quality research.
Related Concept Videos
Varicose Veins II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Inflammatory Bowel Disease V: Surgical Management
Here are some common surgical interventions for IBD:

