| Literature DB >> 28253850 |
Juan P Bouchacourt1, Juan Riva1, Juan C Grignola2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulse pressure (PPV) and stroke volume (SVV) variations may not be reliable in the setting of pulmonary hypertension and/or right ventricular (RV) failure. We hypothesized that RV afterload increase attenuates SVV and PPV during hypovolemia in a rabbit model of pulmonary embolism (PE) secondary to RV dysfunction.Entities:
Keywords: Preload dynamic indices; Pulmonary hypertension; Pulse pressure variation; Right ventricular dysfunction; Stroke volume variation
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28253850 PMCID: PMC5335759 DOI: 10.1186/s12871-017-0329-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Anesthesiol ISSN: 1471-2253 Impact factor: 2.217
Fig. 1Raw data showing the different hemodynamic variables in a representative rabbit. AoF and AoP: aortic flow and pressure, respectively, CVP: central venous pressure, LVP and LV dP/dt: left ventricular pressure and its first derivative, respectively, Paw: airway pressure, RVP and RV dP/dt: right ventricular pressure and its first derivative, respectively. BL: baseline, BW: blood withdrawal, PE: pulmonary embolism, VOL: fluid loading
Hemodynamic data during normovolemia (BL), hypovolemia (BW), pulmonary embolism (PE) and volume loading (VOL)
| BL | BW | PE | VOL | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AoF (mL . min-1) | 70 ± 8 | 53 ± 7 | 34 ± 10* | 38 ± 10* |
| HR (bpm) | 191 ± 37 | 180 ± 35 | 153 ± 37 | 152 ± 28 |
| SV (mL) | 0.26 ± 0.04 | 0.22 ± 0.05 | 0.14 ± 0.04* | 0.16 ± 0.03* |
| AoP (mm Hg) | 63 ± 5 | 62 ± 5 | 67 ± 6 | 62 ± 5 |
| RVP (mm Hg) | 20 ± 1 | 19 ± 2 | 30 ± 8*§ | 28 ± 5*§ |
| TSVR (Wood unit) | 0.9 ± 0.14 | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 2.1 ± 0.6* | 1.7 ± 0.4* |
| C (mL . mm Hg-1 × 10-3) | 9.3 ± 1.6 | 7.5 ± 1.7 | 4.5 ± 1.6*§ | 5.0 ± 0.8* |
| Eadyn | 1.1 (0.7, 1.3) | 1.1 (0.8, 1.3) | 1.2 (0.9, 1.8) | 1.4 (0.9, 2.3) |
| CVP (mm Hg) | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 0.13 ± 0.7 | 2.3 ± 0.9§ | 4.4 ± 1.6*§ |
Mean ± SD or median (25th, 75th percentiles). *p < 0.05 vs BL; §p < 0.05 vs BW. AoF, AoP aortic flow and pressure, respectively, C arterial capacitance, CVP central venous pressure, Ea dynamic elastance, HR heart rate, RVP right ventricular pressure, SV stroke volume, TSVR total systemic vascular resistance
Right and left ventricular function data during normovolemia (BL), hypovolemia (BW), pulmonary embolism (PE) and volume loading (VOL)
| BL | BW | PE | VOL | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right ventricle | ||||
| EDP (mm Hg) | 3.9 ± 0.8 | 2.2 ± 0.6 | 5.4 ± 2.1§ | 6.3 ± 1.9§ |
| Tau (msec) | 10 ± 7 | 9 ± 4 | 23 ± 5*§ | 27 ± 7*§ |
| Tau/T (10-3) | 2.1 ± 1.2 | 1.7 ± 0.8 | 4.9 ± 1.5§ | 6.0 ± 2.1*§ |
| dP/dt/DP (sec-1) | 91 ± 22 | 85 ± 21 | 65 ± 20*§ | 69 ± 17* |
| SW (mm Hg.mL) | 3.2 ± 0.5 | 2.9 ± 0.7 | 2.4 ± 0.7 | 2.3 ± 0.8 |
| Left ventricle | ||||
| EDP (mm Hg) | 4.5 ± 1.5 | 1.3 ± 1.1* | 4.0 ± 0.9 | 6.3 ± 1.8§ |
| Tau (msec) | 10 ± 6 | 9 ± 5 | 10 ± 4 | 11 ± 5 |
| Tau/T (10-3) | 2.6 ± 2.3 | 1.7 ± 1.0 | 2.1 ± 1.1 | 2.4 ± 1.5 |
| dP/dt/DP (sec-1) | 131 ± 13 | 126 ± 15 | 94 ± 16*§ | 99 ± 5*§ |
| SW (mm Hg.mL) | 15.0 ± 1.8 | 13.3 ± 3.0 | 9.0 ± 2.7* | 9.5 ± 2.5* |
Mean ± SD. *p < 0.05 vs BL; §p < 0.05 vs BW
EDP end-diastolic pressure, dP/dt/DP ratio of the first derivative of ventricular pressure to the simultaneously highest isovolumic developed pressure, SW stoke work; tau time constant relaxation, Tau /T ratio of tau and cardiac cycle period
Fig. 2Box plots showing changes in A: stroke volume variation (SVV) and B: pulse pressure variation (PPV) during baseline (BL), blood withdrawal (BW), pulmonary embolism (PE) and volume loading (VOL). The line in each box indicates the median. The upper and lower limits of each box indicate the 75th and 25th percentiles, respectively. The error bars above and below each box represent the 90th and 10th percentiles, respectively. * P < 0.05 vs BL; § P < 0.05 vs BW
Fig. 3Right and left stroke work output function curves during baseline (BL), blood withdrawal (BW), pulmonary embolism (PE) and volume loading (VOL). Clouds have been drawn considering one standard deviation for each experimental condition