Literature DB >> 29171669

Volume responsiveness assessed by passive leg raising and a fluid challenge: a critical review focused on mean systemic filling pressure.

K Cooke1, R Sharvill1, S Sondergaard2, A Aneman1,3,4.   

Abstract

This review applied cardiovascular principles relevant to the physiology of venous return in interpreting studies on the utility of a passive leg-raising manoeuvre to identify patients who do (responders) or do not respond to a subsequent intravenous volume challenge with an increase in cardiac output. Values for cardiac output, mean arterial and central venous pressure, and the calculated cardiovascular variables mean systemic filling pressure analogue, heart efficiency, cardiac power indexed by volume state and volume efficiency, before and after passive leg raising as well as before and after fluid volume challenge, were extracted from published studies. Eleven studies including 572 patients and 52% responders were analysed. Cardiac output increased by 12% in responders during passive leg raising and by 22% following a volume challenge. No statistically significant differences were found between responders and non-responders in cardiac output, mean arterial or central venous pressure before the passive leg-raising manoeuvre or the volume challenge. In contrast, the calculated mean (SD) systemic filling pressure analogue, reflecting the intravascular volume, was significantly lower in responders (14.2 (1.8) mmHg) than non-responders (17.5 (3.4) mmHg; p = 0.007) before the passive leg-raising manoeuvre, as well as before fluid volume challenge (14.6 (2.2) mmHg vs. 17.6 (3.5) mmHg, respectively; p = 0.02). The scalar measure volume efficiency was higher in responders at 0.35 compared with non-responders at 0.10. Non-responders also demonstrated deteriorating heart efficiency of -15% and cardiac power of -7% when given an intravenous fluid volume challenge. The results demonstrate that the calculation of mean systemic filling pressure analogue and derived variables can identify patients likely to respond to a fluid volume challenge and provides scalar results rather than merely a dichotomous outcome of responder or non-responder.
© 2017 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardiac output; mean systemic filling pressure; venous return; volume responsiveness

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29171669     DOI: 10.1111/anae.14162

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesia        ISSN: 0003-2409            Impact factor:   6.955


  5 in total

Review 1.  Physiology-guided management of hemodynamics in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Gustavo A Cortes-Puentes; Richard A Oeckler; John J Marini
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-09

2.  Stroke volume variation for predicting responsiveness to fluid therapy in patients undergoing cardiac and thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sheng Huan; Jin Dai; Shilian Song; Guining Zhu; Yihao Ji; Guoping Yin
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 3.006

3.  Assessment of end-tidal carbon dioxide and vena cava collapsibility in volume responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients.

Authors:  S Güney Pınar; M Pekdemir; I U Özturan; N Ö Doğan; E Yaka; S Yılmaz; A Karadaş; D Ferek Emir
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2020-10-25       Impact factor: 0.840

4.  The inspiration hold maneuver is a reliable method to assess mean systemic filling pressure but its clinical value remains unclear.

Authors:  Lex M van Loon; Hans van der Hoeven; Peter H Veltink; Joris Lemson
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-11

5.  Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure.

Authors:  Loek P B Meijs; Joris van Houte; Bente C M Conjaerts; Alexander J G H Bindels; Arthur Bouwman; Saskia Houterman; Jan Bakker
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 2.502

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.