Literature DB >> 33911116

The use of pulse pressure variation for predicting impairment of microcirculatory blood flow.

Christoph R Behem1, Michael F Graessler2, Till Friedheim2, Rahel Kluttig2, Hans O Pinnschmidt3, Anna Duprée4, E Sebastian Debus5, Daniel A Reuter6, Sabine H Wipper7, Constantin J C Trepte2.   

Abstract

Dynamic parameters of preload have been widely recommended to guide fluid therapy based on the principle of fluid responsiveness and with regard to cardiac output. An equally important aspect is however to also avoid volume-overload. This accounts particularly when capillary leakage is present and volume-overload will promote impairment of microcirculatory blood flow. The aim of this study was to evaluate, whether an impairment of intestinal microcirculation caused by volume-load potentially can be predicted using pulse pressure variation in an experimental model of ischemia/reperfusion injury. The study was designed as a prospective explorative large animal pilot study. The study was performed in 8 anesthetized domestic pigs (German landrace). Ischemia/reperfusion was induced during aortic surgery. 6 h after ischemia/reperfusion-injury measurements were performed during 4 consecutive volume-loading-steps, each consisting of 6 ml kg-1 bodyweight-1. Mean microcirculatory blood flow (mean Flux) of the ileum was measured using direct laser-speckle-contrast-imaging. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the ability of pulse pressure variation to predict a decrease in microcirculation. A reduction of ≥ 10% mean Flux was considered a relevant decrease. After ischemia-reperfusion, volume-loading-steps led to a significant increase of cardiac output as well as mean arterial pressure, while pulse pressure variation and mean Flux were significantly reduced (Pairwise comparison ischemia/reperfusion-injury vs. volume loading step no. 4): cardiac output (l min-1) 1.68 (1.02-2.35) versus 2.84 (2.15-3.53), p = 0.002, mean arterial pressure (mmHg) 29.89 (21.65-38.12) versus 52.34 (43.55-61.14), p < 0.001, pulse pressure variation (%) 24.84 (17.45-32.22) versus 9.59 (1.68-17.49), p = 0.004, mean Flux (p.u.) 414.95 (295.18-534.72) versus 327.21 (206.95-447.48), p = 0.006. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.88 (CI 95% 0.73-1.00; p value < 0.001) for pulse pressure variation for predicting a decrease of microcirculatory blood flow. The results of our study show that pulse pressure variation does have the potential to predict decreases of intestinal microcirculatory blood flow due to volume-load after ischemia/reperfusion-injury. This should encourage further translational research and might help to prevent microcirculatory impairment due to excessive fluid resuscitation and to guide fluid therapy in the future.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33911116     DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-88458-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  107 in total

1.  Wet, dry or something else?

Authors:  M C Bellamy
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 9.166

Review 2.  Coupling microcirculation to systemic hemodynamics.

Authors:  Daniel De Backer; Julian A Ortiz; Diamantino Salgado
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.687

Review 3.  Assessment of fluid responsiveness: recent advances.

Authors:  Xavier Monnet; Jean-Louis Teboul
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.687

4.  Hemodynamic coherence and the rationale for monitoring the microcirculation.

Authors:  Can Ince
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 5.  Functional hemodynamic monitoring.

Authors:  Michael R Pinsky
Journal:  Crit Care Clin       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.598

6.  Aortic cross-clamping and reperfusion in pigs reduces microvascular oxygenation by altered systemic and regional blood flow distribution.

Authors:  Martin Siegemund; Jasper van Bommel; Michiel E Stegenga; Wolfgang Studer; Mat van Iterson; Sandra Annaheim; Alexandre Mebazaa; Can Ince
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2010-06-28       Impact factor: 5.108

7.  Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.

Authors:  Andrew Rhodes; Laura E Evans; Waleed Alhazzani; Mitchell M Levy; Massimo Antonelli; Ricard Ferrer; Anand Kumar; Jonathan E Sevransky; Charles L Sprung; Mark E Nunnally; Bram Rochwerg; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Derek C Angus; Djillali Annane; Richard J Beale; Geoffrey J Bellinghan; Gordon R Bernard; Jean-Daniel Chiche; Craig Coopersmith; Daniel P De Backer; Craig J French; Seitaro Fujishima; Herwig Gerlach; Jorge Luis Hidalgo; Steven M Hollenberg; Alan E Jones; Dilip R Karnad; Ruth M Kleinpell; Younsuk Koh; Thiago Costa Lisboa; Flavia R Machado; John J Marini; John C Marshall; John E Mazuski; Lauralyn A McIntyre; Anthony S McLean; Sangeeta Mehta; Rui P Moreno; John Myburgh; Paolo Navalesi; Osamu Nishida; Tiffany M Osborn; Anders Perner; Colleen M Plunkett; Marco Ranieri; Christa A Schorr; Maureen A Seckel; Christopher W Seymour; Lisa Shieh; Khalid A Shukri; Steven Q Simpson; Mervyn Singer; B Taylor Thompson; Sean R Townsend; Thomas Van der Poll; Jean-Louis Vincent; W Joost Wiersinga; Janice L Zimmerman; R Phillip Dellinger
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 8.  Functional haemodynamic monitoring.

Authors:  Michael R Pinsky
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.687

9.  Perioperative Fluid Utilization Variability and Association With Outcomes: Considerations for Enhanced Recovery Efforts in Sample US Surgical Populations.

Authors:  Julie K M Thacker; William K Mountford; Frank R Ernst; Michelle R Krukas; Michael Monty G Mythen
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

Authors:  Maurizio Cecconi; Daniel De Backer; Massimo Antonelli; Richard Beale; Jan Bakker; Christoph Hofer; Roman Jaeschke; Alexandre Mebazaa; Michael R Pinsky; Jean Louis Teboul; Jean Louis Vincent; Andrew Rhodes
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 17.440

View more
  1 in total

1.  Relationship of Effective Circulating Volume with Sublingual Red Blood Cell Velocity and Microvessel Pressure Difference: A Clinical Investigation and Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling.

Authors:  Athanasios Chalkias; Michalis Xenos
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 4.964

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.