PURPOSE: Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) remains a life-threatening disease with classic etiology of systemic inflammatory response and mortality between 30 and 50 %. The aim of the present study is to compare two different treatment strategies of goal-directed hemodynamic management and evaluate their impact on survival, microcirculation, tissue oxygenation, and histopathologic damage in acute pancreatitis in a prospective animal study. METHODS: Thirty-four domestic pigs were randomly assigned to two different treatment groups. After induction of acute pancreatitis, in group 1 volume administration was guided by central venous pressure (CVP >12 mmHg) and mean arterial pressure (MAP). In group 2, hemodynamic management was guided primarily by left-ventricular stroke volume variation (SVV <10 %), MAP, and cardiac output (CO). Treatment according to randomization was performed for 6 h, and tissue oxygen tension in the pancreas and pancreatic microcirculation were evaluated. Thereafter, animals were observed for 7 days and then sacrificed. Standardized tissue specimens were taken post mortem, and histopathologic scoring was performed. RESULTS: Survival after 7 days was 29.4 % in group 2 versus 11.8 % in group 1 (p < 0.05). Pancreatic oxygen tension (138.0 ± 89.5 mmHg versus 71.1 ± 35.3 mmHg; p < 0.05) and pancreatic microcirculation (1,209.9 ± 630 AU versus 732 ± 315 AU; p < 0.05) were significantly higher in group 2. Significantly less histopathologic damage within the pancreas could be analyzed post mortem in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Goal-directed hemodynamic management guided by stroke volume variation led to improved survival, tissue oxygenation, and microcirculatory perfusion, as well as less histopathologic damage in an animal model of severe acute pancreatitis.
PURPOSE: Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) remains a life-threatening disease with classic etiology of systemic inflammatory response and mortality between 30 and 50 %. The aim of the present study is to compare two different treatment strategies of goal-directed hemodynamic management and evaluate their impact on survival, microcirculation, tissue oxygenation, and histopathologic damage in acute pancreatitis in a prospective animal study. METHODS: Thirty-four domestic pigs were randomly assigned to two different treatment groups. After induction of acute pancreatitis, in group 1 volume administration was guided by central venous pressure (CVP >12 mmHg) and mean arterial pressure (MAP). In group 2, hemodynamic management was guided primarily by left-ventricular stroke volume variation (SVV <10 %), MAP, and cardiac output (CO). Treatment according to randomization was performed for 6 h, and tissue oxygen tension in the pancreas and pancreatic microcirculation were evaluated. Thereafter, animals were observed for 7 days and then sacrificed. Standardized tissue specimens were taken post mortem, and histopathologic scoring was performed. RESULTS: Survival after 7 days was 29.4 % in group 2 versus 11.8 % in group 1 (p < 0.05). Pancreaticoxygen tension (138.0 ± 89.5 mmHg versus 71.1 ± 35.3 mmHg; p < 0.05) and pancreatic microcirculation (1,209.9 ± 630 AU versus 732 ± 315 AU; p < 0.05) were significantly higher in group 2. Significantly less histopathologic damage within the pancreas could be analyzed post mortem in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Goal-directed hemodynamic management guided by stroke volume variation led to improved survival, tissue oxygenation, and microcirculatory perfusion, as well as less histopathologic damage in an animal model of severe acute pancreatitis.
Authors: C Bloechle; A Emmermann; T Strate; U J Scheurlen; C Schneider; E Achilles; M Wolf; D Mack; C Zornig; C E Broelsch Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Daniel A Reuter; Julian Bayerlein; Matthias S G Goepfert; Florian C Weis; Erich Kilger; Peter Lamm; Alwin E Goetz Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2003-02-11 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: R Phillip Dellinger; Mitchell M Levy; Jean M Carlet; Julian Bion; Margaret M Parker; Roman Jaeschke; Konrad Reinhart; Derek C Angus; Christian Brun-Buisson; Richard Beale; Thierry Calandra; Jean-Francois Dhainaut; Herwig Gerlach; Maurene Harvey; John J Marini; John Marshall; Marco Ranieri; Graham Ramsay; Jonathan Sevransky; B Taylor Thompson; Sean Townsend; Jeffrey S Vender; Janice L Zimmerman; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Tong J Gan; Andrew Soppitt; Mohamed Maroof; Habib el-Moalem; Kerri M Robertson; Eugene Moretti; Peter Dwane; Peter S A Glass Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Matthew J DiMagno; Erik-Jan Wamsteker; Jennifer Maratt; Mari A Rivera; Joshua P Spaete; Darren D Ballard; Joseph Elmunzer; Sameer D Saini Journal: Pancreas Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 3.327
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
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
Authors: Giuseppe Citerio; Jan Bakker; Matteo Bassetti; Dominique Benoit; Maurizio Cecconi; J Randall Curtis; Glenn Hernandez; Margaret Herridge; Samir Jaber; Michael Joannidis; Laurent Papazian; Mark Peters; Pierre Singer; Martin Smith; Marcio Soares; Antoni Torres; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Jean-François Timsit; Elie Azoulay Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Kai A Bachmann; Constantin J C Trepte; Lena Tomkötter; Andrea Hinsch; Jan Stork; Wilken Bergmann; Lena Heidelmann; Tim Strate; Alwin E Goetz; Daniel A Reuter; Jakob R Izbicki; Oliver Mann Journal: Crit Care Date: 2013-12-05 Impact factor: 9.097