Min Hur1, Seokha Yoo1, Jung-Yoon Choi1, Sun-Kyung Park1, Dhong Eun Jung1, Won Ho Kim2, Jin-Tae Kim1, Jae-Hyon Bahk1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea. wonhokim.ane@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dynamic change in central venous pressure (CVP) was associated with fluid responsiveness. External jugular venous pressure (EJVP) may reliably estimate CVP and have the advantages of being less invasive. We investigated whether increase in EJVP induced by positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) could be a reliable predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent RALP with steep Trendelenburg position were enrolled. PEEP of 10 cmH2O was applied for 5 min and then 300 ml of colloid was administered. EJVP, stroke volume variation (SVV), and cardiac index calculated by pulse contour method were measured before and after the PEEP challenge and colloid administration. Increase in cardiac index > 10% was used to define the fluid responsiveness. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were fluid responders. Neither the increase in EJVP after the initial PEEP nor SVV was significantly different between responders and non-responders. They were not significantly correlated with an increase in cardiac index. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of these two variables were not significantly greater than 0.5. However, a post hoc analysis revealed that AUC of a decrease in EJVP after removal of PEEP was significantly greater than 0.50. CONCLUSION: Our study results suggested that SVV and increase in EJVP after applying PEEP were not accurate predictors of fluid responsiveness during RALP. Further studies are required to find an adequate preload index in robot-assisted urologic surgery with steep Trendelenburg position.
BACKGROUND: Dynamic change in central venous pressure (CVP) was associated with fluid responsiveness. External jugular venous pressure (EJVP) may reliably estimate CVP and have the advantages of being less invasive. We investigated whether increase in EJVP induced by positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) could be a reliable predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent RALP with steep Trendelenburg position were enrolled. PEEP of 10 cmH2O was applied for 5 min and then 300 ml of colloid was administered. EJVP, stroke volume variation (SVV), and cardiac index calculated by pulse contour method were measured before and after the PEEP challenge and colloid administration. Increase in cardiac index > 10% was used to define the fluid responsiveness. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were fluid responders. Neither the increase in EJVP after the initial PEEP nor SVV was significantly different between responders and non-responders. They were not significantly correlated with an increase in cardiac index. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of these two variables were not significantly greater than 0.5. However, a post hoc analysis revealed that AUC of a decrease in EJVP after removal of PEEP was significantly greater than 0.50. CONCLUSION: Our study results suggested that SVV and increase in EJVP after applying PEEP were not accurate predictors of fluid responsiveness during RALP. Further studies are required to find an adequate preload index in robot-assisted urologic surgery with steep Trendelenburg position.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cardiac output; Central venous pressure; Fluid responsiveness; Laparoscopy; Robot surgery
Authors: Tamara M Atkinson; George D Giraud; Brandon M Togioka; Daniel B Jones; Joaquin E Cigarroa Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: T G V Cherpanath; B F Geerts; J J Maas; R B P de Wilde; A B Groeneveld; J R Jansen Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 2.105
Authors: A F Kalmar; F Dewaele; L Foubert; J F Hendrickx; E H Heeremans; M M R F Struys; A Absalom Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2012-01-17 Impact factor: 9.166
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