Literature DB >> 22202713

Volume-limited versus pressure-limited hemodynamic management in septic and nonseptic shock.

Ronald J Trof1, Albertus Beishuizen, Alexander D Cornet, Ralph J de Wit, Armand R J Girbes, A B Johan Groeneveld.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of hemodynamic management guided by upper limits of cardiac filling volumes or pressures on durations of mechanical ventilation and lengths of stay in critically ill patients with shock.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, clinical trial.
SETTING: Mixed intensive care unit of a large teaching hospital and mixed intensive care unit of a tertiary care, academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total 120 septic (n = 72) and nonseptic (n = 48) shock patients, randomized (after stratification) to transpulmonary thermodilution (n = 60) or pulmonary artery catheter (n = 60) between February 2007 and July 2009.
INTERVENTIONS: Hemodynamic management was guided by algorithms including upper limits for fluid resuscitation of extravascular lung water (<10 mL/kg) and global end-diastolic volume index (<850 mL/m) in the transpulmonary thermodilution group and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (<18-20 mm Hg) in the pulmonary artery catheter group for 72 hrs after enrollment.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcomes were ventilator-free days and lengths of stay in the intensive care unit and the hospital. Secondary outcomes included organ failures and mortality. Cardiac comorbidity was more frequent in nonseptic than in septic shock. Ventilator-free days, lengths of stay, organ failures, and 28-day mortality (overall 33.3%) were similar between monitoring groups. Transpulmonary thermodilution (vs. pulmonary artery catheter) monitoring was associated with more days on mechanical ventilation and longer intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay in nonseptic (p = .001) but not in septic shock. In both conditions, fewer patients met the upper limit of volume than of pressure criteria at baseline and transpulmonary thermodilution (vs. pulmonary artery catheter) monitoring was associated with a more positive fluid balance at 24 hrs.
CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamic management guided by transpulmonary thermodilution vs. pulmonary artery catheter in shock did not affect ventilator-free days, lengths of stay, organ failures, and mortality of critically ill patients. Use of the a transpulmonary thermodilution algorithm resulted in more days on mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit length of stay compared with the pulmonary artery catheter algorithm in nonseptic shock but not in septic shock. This may relate to cardiac comorbidity and a more positive fluid balance with use of transpulmonary thermodilution in nonseptic shock.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22202713     DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31823bc5f9

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


  19 in total

1.  A systematic database-derived approach to improve indexation of transpulmonary thermodilution-derived global end-diastolic volume.

Authors:  Wolfgang Huber; Sebastian Mair; Simon Q Götz; Julia Tschirdewahn; Johanna Frank; Josef Höllthaler; Veit Phillip; Roland M Schmid; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 2.  Is there a role for invasive hemodynamic monitoring in acute heart failure management?

Authors:  Daniel De Backer
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2015-06

Review 3.  The transpulmonary thermodilution technique.

Authors:  Samir G Sakka; Daniel A Reuter; Azriel Perel
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  Less invasive hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill patients.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Teboul; Bernd Saugel; Maurizio Cecconi; Daniel De Backer; Christoph K Hofer; Xavier Monnet; Azriel Perel; Michael R Pinsky; Daniel A Reuter; Andrew Rhodes; Pierre Squara; Jean-Louis Vincent; Thomas W Scheeren
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-05-07       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Effectiveness of treatment based on PiCCO parameters in critically ill patients with septic shock and/or acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang; Hongying Ni; Zhixian Qian
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 6.  Alternatives to the Swan-Ganz catheter.

Authors:  Daniel De Backer; Jan Bakker; Maurizio Cecconi; Ludhmila Hajjar; Da Wei Liu; Suzanna Lobo; Xavier Monnet; Andrea Morelli; Sheila Neinan Myatra; Azriel Perel; Michael R Pinsky; Bernd Saugel; Jean-Louis Teboul; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Are management decisions in critical patients changed with use of hemodynamic parameters from transpulmonary thermodilution technique?

Authors:  Ye Rim Chang; Seok Ho Choi; Sung Wook Chang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-08

Review 8.  Physiological changes after fluid bolus therapy in sepsis: a systematic review of contemporary data.

Authors:  Neil J Glassford; Glenn M Eastwood; Rinaldo Bellomo
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2014-12-27       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Haemodynamic monitoring in the intensive care unit: results from a web-based Swiss survey.

Authors:  Nils Siegenthaler; Raphael Giraud; Till Saxer; Delphine S Courvoisier; Jacques-André Romand; Karim Bendjelid
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Use of the PiCCO system in critically ill patients with septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang; Xiao Xu; Min Yao; Huilan Chen; Hongying Ni; Haozhe Fan
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.