Literature DB >> 18306366

Continuous right ventricular end diastolic volume and right ventricular ejection fraction during liver transplantation: a multicenter study.

Giorgio Della Rocca1, Maria Gabriella Costa, Paolo Feltracco, Gianni Biancofiore, Bruno Begliomini, Stefania Taddei, Cecilia Coccia, Livia Pompei, Pierangelo Di Marco, Paolo Pietropaoli.   

Abstract

Cardiac preload is traditionally considered to be represented by its filling pressures, but more recently, estimations of end diastolic volume of the left or right ventricle have been shown to better reflect preload. One method of determining volumes is the evaluation of the continuous right ventricular end diastolic volume index (cRVEDVI) on the basis of the cardiac output thermodilution technique. Because preload and myocardial contractility are the main factors determining cardiac output during liver transplantation (LTx), accurate determination of preload is important. Thus, monitoring of cRVEDVI and cRVEF should help with fluid management and with the assessment of the need for inotropic and vasoactive agents. In this multicenter study, we looked for possible relationships between the stroke volume index (SVI) and cRVEDVI, cRVEF, and filling pressures at 4 predefined steps in 244 patients undergoing LTx. Univariate and multivariate autoregression models (across phases of the surgical procedure) were fitted to assess the possible association between SVI and cRVEDVI, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP), and central venous pressure (CVP) after adjustment for cRVEF (categorized as < or =30, 31-40, and >40%). SVI was strongly associated with both cRVEDVI and cRVEF. The model showing the best fit to the data was that including cRVEDVI. Even after adjustment for cRVEF, there was a statistically significant (P < 0.05) relationship between SVI and cRVEDVI with a regression coefficient (slope of the regression line) of 0.25; this meant that an increase in cRVEDVI of 1 mL m(-2) resulted in an increase in SVI of 0.25 mL m(-2). The correlations between SVI and CVP and PAOP were less strong. We conclude that cRVEDVI reflected preload better than CVP and PAOP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18306366     DOI: 10.1002/lt.21288

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Liver Transpl        ISSN: 1527-6465            Impact factor:   5.799


  8 in total

1.  Inferior vena cava distensibility as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Authors:  Riccardo Moretti; Barbara Pizzi
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.210

Review 2.  Hemodynamic monitoring during liver transplantation: A state of the art review.

Authors:  Mona Rezai Rudnick; Lorenzo De Marchi; Jeffrey S Plotkin
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-06-08

Review 3.  Perioperative monitoring in liver transplant patients.

Authors:  Shweta Singh; Vaibhav Nasa; Manish Tandon
Journal:  J Clin Exp Hepatol       Date:  2012-09-21

4.  Corrected right ventricular end-diastolic volume and initial distribution volume of glucose correlate with cardiac output after cardiac surgery.

Authors:  Junichi Saito; Hironori Ishihara; Eiji Hashiba; Hirobumi Okawa; Tomoyuki Kudo; Masahiro Sawada; Toshihito Tsubo; Kazuyoshi Hirota
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 2.078

5.  Evaluation of New Calibrated Pulse-Wave Analysis (VolumeViewTM/EV1000TM) for Cardiac Output Monitoring Undergoing Living Donor Liver Transplantation.

Authors:  MiHye Park; Sangbin Han; Gaab Soo Kim; Mi Sook Gwak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Evaluation of right ventricular function during liver transplantation with transesophageal echocardiography.

Authors:  Glauber Gouvêa; John Feiner; Sonali Joshi; Rodrigo Diaz; Jose Eduardo Ferreira Manso; Alexandra Rezende Assad; Ismar Lima Cavalcanti; Marcello Fonseca Salgado-Filho; Aline D'Avila Pereira; Nubia Verçosa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-04       Impact factor: 3.752

7.  Is stroke volume variation a useful preload index in liver transplant recipients? A retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Sung-Hoon Kim; Gyu-Sam Hwang; Seon-Ok Kim; Young-Kug Kim
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 3.738

8.  Assessment of fluid responsiveness by inferior vena cava diameter variation in post-pneumonectomy patients.

Authors:  Yan Wang; Yinghou Jiang; Hongning Wu; Runfeng Wang; Ying Wang; Cheng Du
Journal:  Echocardiography       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 1.724

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.