Morgan Caplan1, Arthur Durand1, Perrine Bortolotti1, Delphine Colling1, Julien Goutay1, Thibault Duburcq1, Elodie Drumez2, Anahita Rouze1, Saad Nseir1, Michael Howsam3, Thierry Onimus1, Raphael Favory4, Sebastien Preau5. 1. Division of Intensive Care, University of Lille, CHU Lille, 59000, Lille, France. 2. Department of Biostatistics, BST. University of Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS : Évaluation des Technologies de Santé et des Pratiques Méd icales, CHU Lille, 59000, Lille, France. 3. University of Lille, Inserm, Institut Pasteur de Lille, U1167, 59000, Lille, France. 4. Division of Intensive Care, University of Lille, CHU Lille, Inserm, Institut Pasteur de Lille, Hôpital Roger Salengro, U1167 Avenue Emile Laine, 59000, Lille, France. 5. Division of Intensive Care, University of Lille, CHU Lille, Inserm, Institut Pasteur de Lille, Hôpital Roger Salengro, U1167 Avenue Emile Laine, 59000, Lille, France. seb.preau@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The collapsibility index of the inferior vena cava (cIVC) has potential for predicting fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients, but a standardized approach for measuring the inferior vena cava diameter has yet to be established. The aim was to test the accuracy of different measurement sites of inferior vena cava diameter to predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with sepsis-related circulatory failure and examine the influence of a standardized breathing manoeuvre. RESULTS: Among the 81 patients included in the study, the median Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II was 34 (24; 42). Sepsis was of pulmonary origin in 49 patients (60%). Median volume expansion during the 24 h prior to study inclusion was 1000 mL (0; 2000). Patients were not severely ill: none were intubated, only 20% were on vasopressors, and all were apparently able to perform a standardized breathing exercise. Forty-one (51%) patients were responders to volume expansion (i.e. a ≥ 10% stroke volume index increase). The cIVC was calculated during non-standardized (cIVC-ns) and standardized breathing (cIVC-st) conditions. The accuracy with which both cIVC-ns and cIVC-st predicted fluid responsiveness differed significantly by measurement site (interaction p < 0.001 and < 0.0001, respectively). Measuring inferior vena cava diameters 4 cm caudal to the right atrium predicted fluid responsiveness with the best accuracy. At this site, a standardized breathing manoeuvre also significantly improved predictive power: areas under ROC curves [mean and (95% CI)] for cIVC-ns = 0.85 [0.78-0.94] versus cIVC-st = 0.98 [0.97-1.0], p < 0.001. When cIVC-ns is superior or equal to 33%, fluid responsiveness is predicted with a sensitivity of 66% and a specificity of 92%. When cIVC-st is superior or equal to 44%, fluid responsiveness is predicted with a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 98%. CONCLUSION: The accuracy with which cIVC measurements predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients depends on both the measurement site of inferior vena cava diameters and the breathing regime. Measuring inferior vena cava diameters during a standardized inhalation manoeuvre at 4 cm caudal to the right atrium seems to be the method by which to obtain cIVC measurements best-able to predict patients' response to volume expansion.
BACKGROUND: The collapsibility index of the inferior vena cava (cIVC) has potential for predicting fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients, but a standardized approach for measuring the inferior vena cava diameter has yet to be established. The aim was to test the accuracy of different measurement sites of inferior vena cava diameter to predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with sepsis-related circulatory failure and examine the influence of a standardized breathing manoeuvre. RESULTS: Among the 81 patients included in the study, the median Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II was 34 (24; 42). Sepsis was of pulmonary origin in 49 patients (60%). Median volume expansion during the 24 h prior to study inclusion was 1000 mL (0; 2000). Patients were not severely ill: none were intubated, only 20% were on vasopressors, and all were apparently able to perform a standardized breathing exercise. Forty-one (51%) patients were responders to volume expansion (i.e. a ≥ 10% stroke volume index increase). The cIVC was calculated during non-standardized (cIVC-ns) and standardized breathing (cIVC-st) conditions. The accuracy with which both cIVC-ns and cIVC-st predicted fluid responsiveness differed significantly by measurement site (interaction p < 0.001 and < 0.0001, respectively). Measuring inferior vena cava diameters 4 cm caudal to the right atrium predicted fluid responsiveness with the best accuracy. At this site, a standardized breathing manoeuvre also significantly improved predictive power: areas under ROC curves [mean and (95% CI)] for cIVC-ns = 0.85 [0.78-0.94] versus cIVC-st = 0.98 [0.97-1.0], p < 0.001. When cIVC-ns is superior or equal to 33%, fluid responsiveness is predicted with a sensitivity of 66% and a specificity of 92%. When cIVC-st is superior or equal to 44%, fluid responsiveness is predicted with a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 98%. CONCLUSION: The accuracy with which cIVC measurements predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients depends on both the measurement site of inferior vena cava diameters and the breathing regime. Measuring inferior vena cava diameters during a standardized inhalation manoeuvre at 4 cm caudal to the right atrium seems to be the method by which to obtain cIVC measurements best-able to predict patients' response to volume expansion.
Authors: F Michard; S Boussat; D Chemla; N Anguel; A Mercat; Y Lecarpentier; C Richard; M R Pinsky; J L Teboul Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Jonathan A Silversides; Emmet Major; Andrew J Ferguson; Emma E Mann; Daniel F McAuley; John C Marshall; Bronagh Blackwood; Eddy Fan Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-10-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Jean-Louis Vincent; Yasser Sakr; Charles L Sprung; V Marco Ranieri; Konrad Reinhart; Herwig Gerlach; Rui Moreno; Jean Carlet; Jean-Roger Le Gall; Didier Payen Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Yasser Sakr; Paolo Nahuel Rubatto Birri; Katarzyna Kotfis; Rahul Nanchal; Bhagyesh Shah; Stefan Kluge; Mary E Schroeder; John C Marshall; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 7.598