Moritz Flick1, Ulrike Sand1, Alina Bergholz1, Karim Kouz1, Beate Reiter2, Doris Flotzinger3, Bernd Saugel1,4, Jens Christian Kubitz5. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 3. CNSystems Medizintechnik GmbH, Graz, Austria. 4. Outcomes Research Consortium, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. 5. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University Nuremberg, Prof.-Ernst-Nathan-Str. 1, 90419, Nuremberg, Germany. jens.kubitz@klinikum-nuernberg.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Predicting fluid responsiveness is essential when treating surgical or critically ill patients. When using a pulmonary artery catheter, pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation can be calculated from right ventricular and pulmonary artery pressure waveforms. METHODS: We conducted a prospective interventional study investigating the ability of right ventricular pulse pressure variation (PPVRV) and systolic pressure variation (SPVRV) as well as pulmonary artery pulse pressure variation (PPVPA) and systolic pressure variation (SPVPA) to predict fluid responsiveness in coronary artery bypass (CABG) surgery patients. Additionally, radial artery pulse pressure variation (PPVART) and systolic pressure variation (SPVART) were calculated. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve with 95%-confidence interval (95%-CI) was used to assess the capability to predict fluid responsiveness (defined as an increase in cardiac index of > 15%) after a 500 mL crystalloid fluid challenge. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included in the final analysis. Thirteen patients (39%) were fluid-responders with a mean increase in cardiac index of 25.3%. The AUROC was 0.60 (95%-CI 0.38 to 0.81) for PPVRV, 0.63 (95%-CI 0.43 to 0.83) for SPVRV, 0.58 (95%-CI 0.38 to 0.78) for PPVPA, and 0.71 (95%-CI 0.52 to 0.89) for SPVPA. The AUROC for PPVART was 0.71 (95%-CI 0.53 to 0.89) and for SPVART 0.78 (95%-CI 0.62 to 0.94). The correlation between pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation measurements derived from the different waveforms was weak. CONCLUSIONS: Right ventricular and pulmonary artery pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation seem to be weak predictors of fluid responsiveness in CABG surgery patients.
PURPOSE: Predicting fluid responsiveness is essential when treating surgical or critically ill patients. When using a pulmonary artery catheter, pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation can be calculated from right ventricular and pulmonary artery pressure waveforms. METHODS: We conducted a prospective interventional study investigating the ability of right ventricular pulse pressure variation (PPVRV) and systolic pressure variation (SPVRV) as well as pulmonary artery pulse pressure variation (PPVPA) and systolic pressure variation (SPVPA) to predict fluid responsiveness in coronary artery bypass (CABG) surgery patients. Additionally, radial artery pulse pressure variation (PPVART) and systolic pressure variation (SPVART) were calculated. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve with 95%-confidence interval (95%-CI) was used to assess the capability to predict fluid responsiveness (defined as an increase in cardiac index of > 15%) after a 500 mL crystalloid fluid challenge. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included in the final analysis. Thirteen patients (39%) were fluid-responders with a mean increase in cardiac index of 25.3%. The AUROC was 0.60 (95%-CI 0.38 to 0.81) for PPVRV, 0.63 (95%-CI 0.43 to 0.83) for SPVRV, 0.58 (95%-CI 0.38 to 0.78) for PPVPA, and 0.71 (95%-CI 0.52 to 0.89) for SPVPA. The AUROC for PPVART was 0.71 (95%-CI 0.53 to 0.89) and for SPVART 0.78 (95%-CI 0.62 to 0.94). The correlation between pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation measurements derived from the different waveforms was weak. CONCLUSIONS: Right ventricular and pulmonary artery pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation seem to be weak predictors of fluid responsiveness in CABG surgery patients.
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: Jens C Kubitz; Thorsten Annecke; Gregor I Kemming; Stefanie Forkl; Nils Kronas; Alwin E Goetz; Daniel A Reuter Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2006-05-24 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Jens C Kubitz; Stefanie Forkl; Thorsten Annecke; Nils Kronas; Alwin E Goetz; Daniel A Reuter Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2008-04-22 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Michael R Mathis; Samuel A Schechtman; Milo C Engoren; Amy M Shanks; Aleda Thompson; Sachin Kheterpal; Kevin K Tremper Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Daniel De Backer; Sarah Heenen; Michael Piagnerelli; Marc Koch; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-03-08 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Jorge Iván Alvarado Sánchez; Juan Daniel Caicedo Ruiz; Juan José Diaztagle Fernández; William Fernando Amaya Zuñiga; Gustavo Adolfo Ospina-Tascón; Luis Eduardo Cruz Martínez Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 6.925