Literature DB >> 22278593

Can changes in arterial pressure be used to detect changes in cardiac index during fluid challenge in patients with septic shock?

Charalampos Pierrakos1, Dimitrios Velissaris, Sabino Scolletta, Sarah Heenen, Daniel De Backer, Jean-Louis Vincent.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Response to fluid challenge is often defined as an increase in cardiac index (CI) of more than 10-15%. However, in clinical practice CI values are often not available. We evaluated whether changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP) correlate with changes in CI after fluid challenge in patients with septic shock.
METHODS: This was an observational study in which we reviewed prospectively collected data from 51 septic shock patients in whom complete hemodynamic measurements had been obtained before and after a fluid challenge with 1,000 ml crystalloid (Hartman's solution) or 500 ml colloid (hydroxyethyl starch 6%). CI was measured using thermodilution. Patients were divided into two groups (responders and non-responders) according to their change in CI (responders: %CI >10%) after the fluid challenge. Statistical analysis was performed using a two-way analysis of variance test followed by a Student's t test with adjustment for multiple comparisons. Pearson's correlation and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were also used.
RESULTS: Mean patient age was 67 ± 17 years and mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) upon admittance to the intensive care unit was 10 ± 3. In the 25 responders, MAP increased from 69 ± 9 to 77 ± 9 mmHg, pulse pressure (PP) increased from 59 ± 15 to 67 ± 16, and CI increased from 2.8 ± 0.8 to 3.4 ± 0.9 L/min/m(2) (all p < 0.001). There were no significant correlations between the changes in MAP, PP, and CI.
CONCLUSIONS: Changes in MAP do not reliably track changes in CI after fluid challenge in patients with septic shock and, consequently, should be interpreted carefully when evaluating the response to fluid challenge in such patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22278593     DOI: 10.1007/s00134-011-2457-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med        ISSN: 0342-4642            Impact factor:   17.440


  38 in total

1.  Relationship between aortic-to-radial arterial pressure gradient after cardiopulmonary bypass and changes in arterial elasticity.

Authors:  Masahiro Kanazawa; Haruo Fukuyama; Yoshio Kinefuchi; Mamoru Takiguchi; Toshiyasu Suzuki
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 2.  Volume responsiveness.

Authors:  Xavier Monnet; Jean-Louis Teboul
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.687

3.  When to recalibrate the PiCCO? From a physiological point of view, the answer is simple.

Authors:  K Bendjelid
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.105

4.  Peripheral vascular decoupling in porcine endotoxic shock.

Authors:  Feras Hatib; Jos R C Jansen; Michael R Pinsky
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2011-06-23

5.  Hemodynamic response to fluid challenge: a means of assessing volume status in the critically ill.

Authors:  H M Horst; F N Obeid
Journal:  Henry Ford Hosp Med J       Date:  1986

Review 6.  Wave reflections and the arterial pulse.

Authors:  M F O'Rourke; T Yaginuma
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1984-02

7.  Arterial pressure allows monitoring the changes in cardiac output induced by volume expansion but not by norepinephrine.

Authors:  Xavier Monnet; Alexia Letierce; Olfa Hamzaoui; Denis Chemla; Nadia Anguel; David Osman; Christian Richard; Jean-Louis Teboul
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume.

Authors:  Daniel De Backer; Sarah Heenen; Michael Piagnerelli; Marc Koch; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-03-08       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Hemodynamic monitoring in sepsis.

Authors:  Brian Casserly; Richard Read; Mitchell M Levy
Journal:  Crit Care Clin       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.598

10.  Global end-diastolic volume as an indicator of cardiac preload in patients with septic shock.

Authors:  Frédéric Michard; Sami Alaya; Véronique Zarka; Mabrouk Bahloul; Christian Richard; Jean-Louis Teboul
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 9.410

View more
  50 in total

1.  Recommendations for the implementation of a Patient Blood Management programme. Application to elective major orthopaedic surgery in adults.

Authors:  Stefania Vaglio; Domenico Prisco; Gianni Biancofiore; Daniela Rafanelli; Paola Antonioli; Michele Lisanti; Lorenzo Andreani; Leonardo Basso; Claudio Velati; Giuliano Grazzini; Giancarlo M Liumbruno
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 3.443

Review 2.  Passive leg raising for predicting fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xavier Monnet; Paul Marik; Jean-Louis Teboul
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Effects of fluid administration on arterial load in septic shock patients.

Authors:  Manuel Ignacio Monge García; Pedro Guijo González; Manuel Gracia Romero; Anselmo Gil Cano; Chris Oscier; Andrew Rhodes; Robert Michael Grounds; Maurizio Cecconi
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Dynamic device properties of pulse contour cardiac output during transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Martin Petzoldt; Carsten Riedel; Jan Braeunig; Sebastian Haas; Matthias S Goepfert; Hendrik Treede; Stephan Baldus; Alwin E Goetz; Daniel A Reuter
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  Fluid administration for acute circulatory dysfunction using basic monitoring: narrative review and expert panel recommendations from an ESICM task force.

Authors:  Maurizio Cecconi; Glenn Hernandez; Martin Dunser; Massimo Antonelli; Tim Baker; Jan Bakker; Jacques Duranteau; Sharon Einav; A B Johan Groeneveld; Tim Harris; Sameer Jog; Flavia R Machado; Mervyn Mer; M Ignacio Monge García; Sheila Nainan Myatra; Anders Perner; Jean-Louis Teboul; Jean-Louis Vincent; Daniel De Backer
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  Do not abandon monitoring the central venous pressure during fluid resuscitation of septic shock patients.

Authors:  Jihad Mallat; Benjamin John Reddi
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Overview of progresses in critical care medicine 2012.

Authors:  Wei Huang; Xianyao Wan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Understanding hypovolaemia.

Authors:  Anders Perner; Daniel De Backer
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 9.  Fluid resuscitation in sepsis: the great 30 mL per kg hoax.

Authors:  Paul E Marik; Liam Byrne; Frank van Haren
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.895

10.  Prediction of fluid responsiveness in severe preeclamptic patients with oliguria.

Authors:  Clément Brun; Laurent Zieleskiewicz; Julien Textoris; Laurent Muller; Jean-Pierre Bellefleur; François Antonini; Maxime Tourret; Denis Ortega; Armand Vellin; Jean-Yves Lefrant; Léon Boubli; Florence Bretelle; Claude Martin; Marc Leone
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-12-06       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.