Phenylephrine-induced recruitable preload from the venous side

Vasoconstriction with phenylephrine increases cardiac output in preload dependent patients

General Anaesthesia (GA) is accompanied by a marked decrease in sympathetic outflow and thus loss of vasomotor control of cardiac preload. The use of vasoconstriction during GA has mainly focused on maintaining blood pressure. Phenylephrine (PE) is a pure α1-agonist without inotropic effects widely used to correct intraoperative hypotension. The potential of PE for augmenting cardiac stroke volume (SV) and -output (CO) by venous recruitment is controversial and no human studies have explored the effects of PE in preload dependent circulation using indicator dilution technique. We hypothesized that PE-infusion in patients with cardiac stroke volume limited by reduced preload would restore preload and thus augment SV and CO. 20 patients undergoing GA for gastrointestinal surgery were monitored with arterial catheter and LiDCO unity monitor. Upon stable haemodynamics after induction patients were placed in head-up tilt (HUT). All patients became preload responsive as verified by a stroke volume variation (SVV) of > 12%. PE-infusion was then started at 15-20mikrg/min and adjusted until preload was restored (SVV < 12%). Li-dilution cardiac output (CO) was initially measured after induction (baseline), again with HUT in the preload responsive phase, and finally when preload was restored with infusion of PE.At baseline SVV was 10 ± 3% (mean ± st.dev.), CI was 2,6 ± 0,4 L/min*m2, and SVI 43 ± 7mL/m2. With HUT SVV was 19 ± 4%, CI was 2,2 ± 0,4 L/min*m2, SVI 35 ± 7mL/m2. During PE-infusion SVV was reduced to 6 ± 3%, CI increased to 2,6 ± 0,5 L/min*m2, and SVI increased to 49 ± 11mL/m2. All differences p < 0,001. In conclusion: Infusion of phenylephrine during preload dependency increased venous return abolishing preload dependency as evaluated by SVV and increased cardiac stroke volume and -output as measured by indicator-dilution technique. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05193097).

Intravenous fluid therapy in patients with severe acute pancreatitis admitted to the intensive care unit: a narrative review

Patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) often require ICU admission, especially when signs of multiorgan failure are present, a condition that defines AP as severe. This disease is characterized by a massive pancreatic release of pro-inflammatory cytokines that causes a systemic inflammatory response syndrome and a profound intravascular fluid loss. This leads to a mixed hypovolemic and distributive shock and ultimately to multiorgan failure. Aggressive fluid resuscitation is traditionally considered the mainstay treatment of AP. In fact, all available guidelines underline the importance of fluid therapy, particularly in the first 24–48 h after disease onset. However, there is currently no consensus neither about the type, nor about the optimal fluid rate, total volume, or goal of fluid administration. In general, a starting fluid rate of 5–10 ml/kg/h of Ringer’s lactate solution for the first 24 h has been recommended. Fluid administration should be aggressive in the first hours, and continued only for the appropriate time frame, being usually discontinued, or significantly reduced after the first 24–48 h after admission. Close clinical and hemodynamic monitoring along with the definition of clear resuscitation goals are fundamental. Generally accepted targets are urinary output, reversal of tachycardia and hypotension, and improvement of laboratory markers. However, the usefulness of different endpoints to guide fluid therapy is highly debated. The importance of close monitoring of fluid infusion and balance is acknowledged by most available guidelines to avoid the deleterious effect of fluid overload. Fluid therapy should be carefully tailored in patients with severe AP, as for other conditions frequently managed in the ICU requiring large fluid amounts, such as septic shock and burn injury. A combination of both noninvasive clinical and invasive hemodynamic parameters, and laboratory markers should guide clinicians in the early phase of severe AP to meet organ perfusion requirements with the proper administration of fluids while avoiding fluid overload. In this narrative review the most recent evidence about fluid therapy in severe AP is discussed and an operative algorithm for fluid administration based on an individualized approach is proposed.

Fluid Management, Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome: A Narrative Review

Background: General pathophysiological mechanisms regarding associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) are evident, but specific effects of type, amount, and timing of fluids are less clear. Objectives: This review aims to summarize current knowledge on associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and fluid management in patients at risk of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Methods: We performed a structured literature search from 1950 until May 2021 to identify evidence of associations between fluid management and intra-abdominal pressure not limited to any specific study or patient population. Findings were summarized based on the following information: general concepts of fluid management, physiology of fluid movement in patients with intra-abdominal hypertension, and data on associations between fluid administration and IAH. Results: We identified three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 38 prospective observational studies, 29 retrospective studies, 18 case reports in adults, two observational studies and 10 case reports in children, and three animal studies that addressed associations between fluid administration and IAH. Associations between fluid resuscitation and IAH were confirmed in most studies. Fluid resuscitation contributes to the development of IAH. However, patients with IAH receive more fluids to manage the effect of IAH on other organ systems, thereby causing a vicious cycle. Timing and approach to de-resuscitation are of utmost importance, but clear indicators to guide this decision-making process are lacking. In selected cases, only surgical decompression of the abdomen can stop deterioration and prevent further morbidity and mortality. Conclusions: Current evidence confirms an association between fluid resuscitation and secondary IAH, but optimal fluid management strategies for patients with IAH remain controversial.