Comparative Analysis of the Collapsibility Index and Distensibility Index of the Inferior Vena Cava Through Echocardiography with Pulse Pressure Variation That Predicts Fluid Responsiveness in Surgical Patients: An Observational Controlled Trial

Stroke volume variation induced by lung recruitment maneuver to predict fluid responsiveness in patients receiving mechanical ventilation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of lung recruitment maneuver induced stroke volume variation (ΔSVLRM) in predicting fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated adult patients by systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic search of relevant literature was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, Embase and Chinese databases (including China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and VIP databases). Review Manager 5.4, Meta-DiSc 1.4 and STATA 16.0 were selected for data analysis, and QUADAS-2 tool was used for quality assessment. Data from selected studies were pooled to obtain sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic likelihood ratio (DLR) of positive and negative, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies with 256 patients were enrolled through March 2024. The risk of bias and applicability concerns for each included study were low, and there was no significant publication bias. There was moderate to substantial heterogeneity for the non-threshold effect, but not for the threshold effect. The combined sensitivity and specificity were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.77-0.90) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.70-0.86), respectively. The DOR and the area under the curve (AUC) were 22.15 (95%CI, 7.62-64.34) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.92), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values of DLR were 4.53 (95% CI, 2.50-8.18) and 0.19 (95% CI, 0.11-0.35), respectively. Fagan's nomogram showed that with a pre-test probability of 52%, the post-test probability reached 83% and 17% for the positive and negative tests, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the currently available evidence, ΔSVLRM has a good diagnostic value for predicting the fluid responsiveness in adult patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Given the heterogeneity and limitations of the published data, further studies with large sample sizes and different clinical settings are needed to confirm the diagnostic value of ΔSVLRM in predicting fluid responsiveness. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023490598.

Comparison of vena cava distensibility index and pulse pressure variation for the evaluation of intravascular volume in critically ill children

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the authors aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the vena cava distensibility index and pulse pressure variation as dynamic parameters for estimating intravascular volume in critically ill children.

METHODS

Patients aged 1 month to 18 years, who were hospitalized in the present study's pediatric intensive care unit, were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to central venous pressure: hypovolemic (< 8 mmHg) and non-hypovolemic (central venous pressure ≥ 8 mmHg) groups. In both groups, vena cava distensibility index was measured using bedside ultrasound and pulse pressure variation. Measurements were recorded and evaluated under arterial monitoring.

RESULTS

In total, 19 (47.5%) of the 40 subjects included in the study were assigned to the central venous pressure ≥ 8 mmHg group, and 21 (52.5%) to the central venous pressure < 8 mmHg group. A moderate positive correlation was found between pulse pressure variation and vena cava distensibility index (r = 0.475, p < 0.01), while there were strong negative correlations of central venous pressure with pulse pressure variation and vena cava distensibility index (r = -0.628, p < 0.001 and r = -0.760, p < 0.001, respectively). In terms of predicting hypovolemia, the predictive power for vena cava distensibility index was > 16% (sensitivity, 90.5%; specificity, 94.7%) and that for pulse pressure variation was > 14% (sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 89.5%).

CONCLUSION

Vena cava distensibility index has higher sensitivity and specificity than pulse pressure variation for estimating intravascular volume, along with the advantage of non-invasive bedside application.

Assessment of Volume Status and Fluid Responsiveness in Small Animals

Intravenous fluids are an essential component of shock management in human and veterinary emergency and critical care to increase cardiac output and improve tissue perfusion. Unfortunately, there are very few evidence-based guidelines to help direct fluid therapy in the clinical setting. Giving insufficient fluids and/or administering fluids too slowly to hypotensive patients with hypovolemia can contribute to continued hypoperfusion and increased morbidity and mortality. Similarly, giving excessive fluids to a volume unresponsive patient can contribute to volume overload and can equally increase morbidity and mortality. Therefore, assessing a patient's volume status and fluid responsiveness, and monitoring patient's response to fluid administration is critical in maintaining the balance between meeting a patient's fluid needs vs. contributing to complications of volume overload. This article will focus on the physiology behind fluid responsiveness and the methodologies used to estimate volume status and fluid responsiveness in the clinical setting.