Literature DB >> 19114894

Influence of increased intra-abdominal pressure on fluid responsiveness predicted by pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation in a porcine model.

Jochen Renner1, Matthias Gruenewald, Rene Quaden, Robert Hanss, Patrick Meybohm, Markus Steinfath, Jens Scholz, Berthold Bein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Dynamic variables of fluid responsiveness such as pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume variation (SVV) have been shown to reliably predict the response to fluid administration in different patient populations. The influence of increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on the predictive ability of these variables is currently under debate. Therefore, the present study was designed to evaluate whether PPV and SVV are suitable for predicting fluid responsiveness during elevated IAP.
DESIGN: Prospective controlled experimental study.
SETTING: Animal research laboratory.
SUBJECTS: 14 anesthetized and mechanically ventilated pigs.
INTERVENTIONS: Pigs were studied at different experimental stages: normovolemia at baseline conditions, after induction of pneumoperitoneum (PP) by increasing IAP up to 25 mm Hg, followed by releasing PP and performing a fluid load with 1000 cc hydroxyl-ethyl starch 6%, and finally after inducing PP again. Cardiac output, stroke volume, central venous pressure, and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure were obtained by pulmonary artery thermodilution. Additionally, global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) was measured by transpulmonary thermodilution. PPV and SVV were monitored continuously by pulse contour analysis.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: PP induced significant changes in peak airway pressure, esophageal pressure, chest wall compliance, SVV, PPV, central venous pressure, and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure independent of loading conditions. As assessed by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, PPV, SVV, and GEDV accurately predicted fluid responsiveness before IAP was increased (area under the curve: 0.90, 0.91 and 0.91). A PPV value of >or=11.5%, a SVV value of >or=9.5%, and a GEDV value of <or=963 mL accurately predicted an increase in stroke volume >or=15%. After increasing IAP, the ability of SVV to predict fluid responsiveness was abolished, whereas it was preserved with both PPV and GEDV, although the threshold value for PPV dramatically increased up to >or=20.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: : In this animal model PPV and GEDV proved to be sensitive and specific predictors of fluid responsiveness even during increased IAP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19114894     DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181959864

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  31 in total

1.  Respiratory induced dynamic variations of stroke volume and its surrogates as predictors of fluid responsiveness: applicability in the early stages of specific critical states.

Authors:  Jan Benes; Jan Zatloukal; Jakub Kletecka; Alena Simanova; Lenka Haidingerova; Richard Pradl
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Does intravenous landiolol, a β1-adrenergic blocker, affect stroke volume variation?

Authors:  Zen'ichiro Wajima; Toshiya Shiga; Kazuyuki Imanaga; Tetsuo Inoue
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 2.078

3.  Applicability of stroke volume variation in patients of a general intensive care unit: a longitudinal observational study.

Authors:  Sebastian Mair; Julia Tschirdewahn; Simon Götz; Johanna Frank; Veit Phillip; Benedikt Henschel; Caroline Schultheiss; Ulrich Mayr; Sebastian Noe; Matthias Treiber; Roland M Schmid; Bernd Saugel; Wolfgang Huber
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2016-11-05       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  Predictive values of pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation for fluid responsiveness in patients with pneumoperitoneum.

Authors:  Marko Zlicar; Vesna Novak-Jankovic; Rok Blagus; Maurizio Cecconi
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  Arterial Pressure Variation in Elective Noncardiac Surgery: Identifying Reference Distributions and Modifying Factors.

Authors:  Michael R Mathis; Samuel A Schechtman; Milo C Engoren; Amy M Shanks; Aleda Thompson; Sachin Kheterpal; Kevin K Tremper
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  The use of pulse pressure variation for predicting impairment of microcirculatory blood flow.

Authors:  Christoph R Behem; Michael F Graessler; Till Friedheim; Rahel Kluttig; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Anna Duprée; E Sebastian Debus; Daniel A Reuter; Sabine H Wipper; Constantin J C Trepte
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Mandatory criteria for the application of variability-based parameters of fluid responsiveness: a prospective study in different groups of ICU patients.

Authors:  Wolfgang Huber; Uli Mayr; Andreas Umgelter; Michael Franzen; Wolfgang Reindl; Roland M Schmid; Florian Eckel
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 3.066

8.  Abdominal compartment syndrome.

Authors:  Manu Malbrain
Journal:  F1000 Med Rep       Date:  2009-11-16

9.  Pulse pressure variation and volume responsiveness during acutely increased pulmonary artery pressure: an experimental study.

Authors:  Fritz Daudel; David Tüller; Stefanie Krähenbühl; Stephan M Jakob; Jukka Takala
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2010-06-24       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 10.  Functional haemodynamic monitoring.

Authors:  Michael R Pinsky
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.687

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.