Marc-Olivier Fischer1, Yazine Mahjoub2, Clément Boisselier3, Benoît Tavernier4, Hervé Dupont2, Marc Leone5, Jean-Yves Lefrant6, Jean-Louis Gérard7, Jean-Luc Hanouz7, Jean-Luc Fellahi7. 1. Pôle Réanimations Anesthésie Samu/Smur, CHU de Caen, avenue de la Côte-de-Nacre, CS 30001, 14000 Caen, France; EA 4650, Université de Caen Basse-Normandie, Esplanade de la Paix, CS 14032, 14000 Caen, France. Electronic address: fischer-mo@chu-caen.fr. 2. Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation, CHU d'Amiens, place Victor-Pauchet, 80054 Amiens, France. 3. Pôle Réanimations Anesthésie Samu/Smur, CHU de Caen, avenue de la Côte-de-Nacre, CS 30001, 14000 Caen, France. 4. Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation, CHRU de Lille, Hôpital Roger-Salengro, rue Emile-Laine, 59037 Lille, France. 5. Service d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation, Hôpital Nord, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, 13000 Marseille, France. 6. Service de Réanimation, Nîmes, Hôpital Universitaire Carémeau, place du Pr-Robert-Debré, 30029 Nîmes Cedex 9, France. 7. Pôle Réanimations Anesthésie Samu/Smur, CHU de Caen, avenue de la Côte-de-Nacre, CS 30001, 14000 Caen, France; EA 4650, Université de Caen Basse-Normandie, Esplanade de la Paix, CS 14032, 14000 Caen, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Arterial pulse pressure variation (PPV) has been used as an accurate index to predict fluid responsiveness. However, many confounding factors have been recently described. The aims of this study were to assess the conditions of applicability of PPV in intensive care units (ICU). STUDY DESIGN: A one-day French national survey. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A form assessing the suitability of PPV was completed by practitioners for each critically-ill patient included on a set day. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-five patients were included in 36 ICUs. A regular sinus rhythm was noted in 408 (88%) patients and the presence of an arterial line in 324 (70%) patients. One hundred and twenty-seven (27%) patients were mechanically ventilated without spontaneous breathing. Only six patients (1.3%) had no confounding factors modifying the threshold value of the PPV. CONCLUSION: The incidence of ICU patients in whom PPV was suitable and without confounding factors were respectively 18% and 1.3% in this one-day French national survey.
OBJECTIVE: Arterial pulse pressure variation (PPV) has been used as an accurate index to predict fluid responsiveness. However, many confounding factors have been recently described. The aims of this study were to assess the conditions of applicability of PPV in intensive care units (ICU). STUDY DESIGN: A one-day French national survey. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A form assessing the suitability of PPV was completed by practitioners for each critically-ill patient included on a set day. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-five patients were included in 36 ICUs. A regular sinus rhythm was noted in 408 (88%) patients and the presence of an arterial line in 324 (70%) patients. One hundred and twenty-seven (27%) patients were mechanically ventilated without spontaneous breathing. Only six patients (1.3%) had no confounding factors modifying the threshold value of the PPV. CONCLUSION: The incidence of ICU patients in whom PPV was suitable and without confounding factors were respectively 18% and 1.3% in this one-day French national survey.