Accuracy, Precision, and Trending of 4 Pulse Wave Analysis Techniques in the Postoperative Period

Intraoperative Hypotension Prediction—A Proactive Perioperative Hemodynamic Management—A Literature Review

Intraoperative hypotension (IH) is a frequent phenomenon affecting a substantial number of patients undergoing general anesthesia. The occurrence of IH is related to significant perioperative complications, including kidney failure, myocardial injury, and even increased mortality. Despite advanced hemodynamic monitoring and protocols utilizing goal directed therapy, our management is still reactive; we intervene when the episode of hypotension has already occurred. This literature review evaluated the Hypotension Prediction Index (HPI), which is designed to predict and reduce the incidence of IH. The HPI algorithm is based on a machine learning algorithm that analyzes the arterial pressure waveform as an input and the occurrence of hypotension with MAP <65 mmHg for at least 1 min as an output. There are several studies, both retrospective and prospective, showing a significant reduction in IH episodes with the use of the HPI algorithm. However, the level of evidence on the use of HPI remains very low, and further studies are needed to show the benefits of this algorithm on perioperative outcomes.

The Use of the Hypotension Prediction Index Integrated in an Algorithm of Goal Directed Hemodynamic Treatment during Moderate and High-Risk Surgery

(1) Background: The Hypotension Prediction Index (HPI) is an algorithm that predicts hypotension, defined as mean arterial pressure (MAP) less than 65 mmHg for at least 1 min, based on arterial waveform features. We tested the hypothesis that the use of this index reduces the duration and severity of hypotension during noncardiac surgery. (2) Methods: We enrolled adults having moderate- or high-risk noncardiac surgery with invasive arterial pressure monitoring. Participating patients were randomized 1:1 to standard of care or hemodynamic management with HPI guidance with a goal directed hemodynamic treatment protocol. The trigger to initiate treatment (with fluids, vasopressors, or inotropes) was a value of HPI of 85 (range, 0–100) or higher in the intervention group. Primary outcome was the amount of hypotension, defined as time-weighted average (TWA) MAP less than 65 mmHg. Secondary outcomes were time spent in hypertension defined as MAP more than 100 mmHg for at least 1 min; medication and fluids administered and postoperative complications. (3) Results: We obtained data from 99 patients. The median (IQR) TWA of hypotension was 0.16 mmHg (IQR, 0.01–0.32 mmHg) in the intervention group versus 0.50 mmHg (IQR, 0.11–0.97 mmHg) in the control group, for a median difference of −0.28 (95% CI, −0.48 to −0.09 mmHg; p = 0.0003). We also observed an increase in hypertension in the intervention group as well as a higher weight-adjusted administration of phenylephrine in the intervention group. (4) Conclusions: In this single-center prospective study of patients undergoing elective noncardiac surgery, the use of this prediction model resulted in less intraoperative hypotension compared with standard care. An increase in the time spent in hypertension in the treatment group was also observed, probably as a result of overtreatment. This should provide an insight for refining the use of this prediction index in future studies to avoid excessive correction of blood pressure.

Clinical Application of the Fluid Challenge Approach in Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy: What Can We Learn From Human Studies?

Resuscitative fluid therapy aims to increase stroke volume (SV) and cardiac output (CO) and restore/improve tissue oxygen delivery in patients with circulatory failure. In individualized goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT), fluids are titrated based on the assessment of responsiveness status (i.e., the ability of an individual to increase SV and CO in response to volume expansion). Fluid administration may increase venous return, SV and CO, but these effects may not be predictable in the clinical setting. The fluid challenge (FC) approach, which consists on the intravenous administration of small aliquots of fluids, over a relatively short period of time, to test if a patient has a preload reserve (i.e., the relative position on the Frank-Starling curve), has been used to guide fluid administration in critically ill humans. In responders to volume expansion (defined as individuals where SV or CO increases ≥10–15% from pre FC values), FC administration is repeated until the individual no longer presents a preload reserve (i.e., until increases in SV or CO are <10–15% from values preceding each FC) or until other signs of shock are resolved (e.g., hypotension). Even with the most recent technological developments, reliable and practical measurement of the response variable (SV or CO changes induced by a FC) has posed a challenge in GDFT. Among the methods used to evaluate fluid responsiveness in the human medical field, measurement of aortic flow velocity time integral by point-of-care echocardiography has been implemented as a surrogate of SV changes induced by a FC and seems a promising non-invasive tool to guide FC administration in animals with signs of circulatory failure. This narrative review discusses the development of GDFT based on the FC approach and the response variables used to assess fluid responsiveness status in humans and animals, aiming to open new perspectives on the application of this concept to the veterinary field.

Comparison of accuracy of two uncalibrated pulse contour cardiac output monitors in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery patients using pulmonary artery catheter-thermodilution as a reference

Background

Cardiac output (CO) is a key measure of adequacy of organ and tissue perfusion, especially in critically ill or complex surgical patients. CO monitoring technology continues to evolve. Recently developed CO monitors rely on unique algorithms based on pulse contour analysis of an arterial blood pressure (ABP) waveform. The objective of this investigation was to compare the accuracy of two monitors using different methods of pulse contour analysis – the Retia Argos device and the Edwards Vigileo-FloTrac device – with pulmonary artery catheter (PAC)-thermodilution as a reference.

Methods

Fifty-eight patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery formed the study cohort. A total of 572 triplets of CO measurements from each device – Argos, Vigileo-FloTrac (third generation), and thermodilution – were available before and after interventions (e.g., vasopressors, fluids, and inotropes). Bland–Altman analysis accounting for repeated measurements per subject and concordance analysis were applied to assess the accuracy of the CO values and intervention-induced CO changes of each pulse contour device against thermodilution. Cluster bootstrapping was employed to statistically compare the root-mean-squared-errors (RMSE = √(μ² + σ²), where μ and σ are the Bland–Altman bias and precision errors) and concordance rates of the two devices.

Results

The RMSE (mean (95% confidence intervals)) for CO values was 1.16 (1.00–1.32) L/min for the Argos device and 1.54 (1.33–1.77) L/min for the Vigileo-FloTrac device; the concordance rate for intervention-induced CO changes was 87 (82–92)% for the Argos device and 72 (65–78)% for the Vigileo-FloTrac device; and the RMSE for the CO changes was 17 (15–19)% for the Argos device and 21 (19–23)% for the Vigileo-FloTrac device (p < 0.0167 for all comparisons).

Conclusions

In comparison with CO measured by the PAC, the Argos device proved to be more accurate than the Vigileo-FloTrac device in CO trending and absolute CO measurement in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01415-5.

Guidelines for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery. Consensus document of Spanish Societies of Anesthesia (SEDAR), Cardiovascular Surgery (SECCE) and Perfusionists (AEP)

The ERAS guidelines are intended to identify, disseminate and promote the implementation of the best, scientific evidence-based actions to decrease variability in clinical practice. The implementation of these practices in the global clinical process will promote better outcomes and the shortening of hospital and critical care unit stays, thereby resulting in a reduction in costs and in greater efficiency. After completing a systematic review at each of the points of the perioperative process in cardiac surgery, recommendations have been developed based on the best scientific evidence currently available with the consensus of the scientific societies involved.

Measuring cardiac output at the bedside

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bedside cardiac output (CO) measurement is an important part of routine hemodynamic monitoring in the differential diagnosis of circulatory shock and fluid management. Different choices of CO measurement devices are available. The purpose of this review is to review the importance of CO [or stroke volume (SV)] measurement and to discuss the various methods (devices) used in determination of CO.

RECENT FINDINGS

CO measurement devices can be classified into two types: those use simple physical principles with minimal assumptions, and those predicting CO via mathematical modelling with a number of assumptions. Both have pros and cons, with the former being more accurate but with limited continuous monitoring capability whereas the latter less accurate but usually equipped with continuous monitoring functionality. With frequent updates in mathematical models, research data constantly become outdated in this area. Recent data suggest devices based on mathematical modelling have limited accuracies and poor precisions.

SUMMARY

Measurement of CO or SV is important in critically ill patients. Most devices have accuracy and reliability issues. The choice of device should depend on the purpose of measurement. For diagnostic purposes, devices based on simple physical principles, especially thermodilution and transthoracic echocardiography are more reliable due to accuracy.

Accuracy of non-invasive and minimally invasive hemodynamic monitoring: where do we stand?

One of the most important variables in assessing hemodynamic status in the intensive care unit (ICU) is the cardiac function and blood pressure. Invasive methods such as pulmonary artery catheter and arterial line allow monitoring of blood pressure and cardiac function accurately and reliably. However, their use is not without drawbacks, especially when the invasive nature of these procedures and complications associated with them are considered. There are several newer methods of noninvasive and minimally invasive hemodynamic monitoring available. In this manuscript, we will review these different methods of minimally invasive and non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring and will discuss their advantages, drawbacks and limitations.

Spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension is caused by a decrease in stroke volume in elderly patients

Background

Hypotension is common during spinal anesthesia (SA) and is caused by a decrease in systemic vascular resistance (SVR) and/or cardiac output (CO). The effect of the dose of bupivacaine administered intrathecally on the changes in CO in elderly patients is largely unknown. This study investigated the hemodynamic effect of SA in elderly patients by studying the effect of two different dosages of intrathecal bupivacaine.

Methods

This prospective cohort study included 64 patients aged >65 years scheduled for procedures under SA; the patients received either 15 mg bupivacaine (the medium dose [MD] group) or 10 mg bupivacaine and 5 μg sufentanil (the low dose [LD] group). Blood pressure and CO were monitored throughout the procedure using Nexfin™, a noninvasive continuous monitoring device using a finger cuff.

Results

Thirty-three patients received MD and 31 received LD and there was no mean difference in baseline hemodynamics between the groups. On an average, the CO decreased 11.6% in the MD group and 10.0 % in the LD group. There was no significant change in SVR. Incidence of a clinically relevant decrease in stroke volume (SV) (>15% from baseline) was 67% in the MD and 45% in the LD groups (P<0.05).

Conclusion

CO and blood pressure decreased significantly after the onset of SA in elderly patients. This is mainly caused by a decrease in SV and not by a decrease in SVR. There was no difference in CO and blood pressure change between dosages of 10 or 15 mg bupivacaine.