| Literature DB >> 26082197 |
Jean-Louis Chauvet1, Shari El-Dash2,3, Olivier Delastre4, Bernard Bouffandeau5, Dominique Jusserand6, Jean-Baptiste Michot7, Fabrice Bauer8, Julien Maizel9,10, Michel Slama11,12.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Based on previously published case reports demonstrating dynamic left intraventricular obstruction (IVO) triggered by hypovolemia or catecholamines, this study aimed to establish: (1) IVO occurrence in septic shock patients; (2) correlation between the intraventricular gradient and volume status and fluid responsiveness; and (3) mortality rate.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26082197 PMCID: PMC4522114 DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-0980-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Crit Care ISSN: 1364-8535 Impact factor: 9.097
Fig. 1Flow chart. IVO intraventricular obstruction
Characteristics of patients with septic shock with and without IVO
| Septic shock patients without IVO (n = 171) | Septic shock patients with IVO (n = 47) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 62 ± 15 | 69 ± 11 | ns |
| Males | 106 (62 %) | 27 (57 %) | ns |
| SAPS II | 54 ± 21 | 59 ± 16 | ns |
| Mechanical ventilation | 149 (87 %) | 39 (83 %) | ns |
| ICU stay duration (days) | 11 ± 27 | 12 ± 10 | ns |
| Medical patients | 109 (64 %) | 32 (68 %) | ns |
| Surgical patients | 62 (36 %) | 15 (32 %) | ns |
| ICU mortality | 41 (24 %) | 25 (53 %) | <0.01 |
| Mortality at 28 days | 57 (33 %) | 26 (55 %) | <0.01 |
Values are shown as n (%) or mean ± SD. IVO intraventricular obstruction, ns not significant, SAPS Simplified Acute Physiology Score
Hemodynamic and echocardiographic characteristics of patients with intraventricular obstruction before and after fluid infusion
| Before | After |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heart rate (beats/minute) | 109 ± 25 | 102 ± 22 | ns |
| Systolic arterial pressure (mmHg) | 110 ± 28 | 141 ± 32 | <0.01 |
| Diastolic arterial pressure (mmHg) | 54 ± 11 | 65 ± 14 | <0.01 |
| Mean arterial pressure (mmHg) | 71 ± 16 | 89 ± 1 | <0.01 |
| Cardiac output (l/minute) | 4.6 ± 1.9 | 5.8 ± 2.1 | <0.01 |
| Cardiac index (l/minute/m2) | 2.4 ± 0.9 | 3 ± 1 | <0.01 |
| Stroke volume (ml) | 43 ± 18 | 58 ± 22 | <0.01 |
| Indexed stroke volume (ml/m2) | 23 ± 10 | 31 ± 11 | <0.01 |
| Intraventricular obstruction (m/s) | 1.9 ± 0.9 | 1 ± 1 | <0.01 |
| Intraventricular obstruction (mmHg) | 18 ± 18 | 8 ± 13 | <0.01 |
| Inferior vena cava diameter (mm) | 16 ± 6.4 | 18 ± 6.6 | ns |
| E/A | 0.8 ± 0.46 | 0.9 ± 0.3 | ns |
| E’ (cm/s) | 14 ± 5 | 16 ± 5 | ns |
| E’/A’ | 0.77 ± 0.26 | 0.87 ± 0.37 | ns |
| E/E’ | 5.8 ± 2.1 | 6.8 ± 1.8 | ns |
A late velocity of diastolic mitral flow, A’ late velocity of diastolic mitral annulus motion, E early diastolic velocity of mitral flow, E’ early velocity of diastolic mitral annulus motion, ns not significant
Fig. 2Left intraventricular obstruction. a Pulsed-wave Doppler curve showing the characteristic late peaking saber-shape indicating a LV outflow obstruction (IVG). b After fluid replacement, the flow profile returns to normal symmetrical shape
Fig. 3Pseudohypertrophy. Echocardiography in the parasternal short axis view. Ventricular wall appear thickened in these two-dimensional images, despite LV mass being unchanged. a The reduction in LVEDD size of the left ventricle (LV). b The near obliteration of the ventricular lumen in systole (“kissing” walls)
Fig. 4Pre- and postfluid bolus comparison. Comparison of intraventricular obstruction gradient before and after a single 500 ml fluid bolus; points correspond to mean values and error bars to two standard errors of the mean. The difference before and after volume expansion was statistically different (p = 0.001)
Logistic regression analysis for 28-day mortality and ICU mortality
| 28-day mortality | ICU mortality | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95 % CI |
| OR | 95 % CI |
| |
| SAPS II | 1.06 | 1.04–1.08 | 0.001 | 1.06 | 1.04–1.09 | 0.001 |
| Presence of IVO | 2.23 | 1.08–4.58 | 0.03 | 3.77 | 1.77–8.03 | 0.001 |
CI confidence interval, IVO intraventricular obstruction, OR odds ratio, SAPS Simplified Acute Physiology Score