Transpulmonary thermodilution techniques in the haemodynamically unstable patient

Subclinical cardiac dysfunction may impact on fluid and vasopressor administration during early resuscitation of septic shock

BACKGROUND

According to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) fluids and vasopressors are the mainstays of early resuscitation of septic shock while inotropes are indicated in case of tissue hypoperfusion refractory to fluids and vasopressors, suggesting severe cardiac dysfunction. However, septic cardiac disfunction encompasses a large spectrum of severities and may remain "subclinical" during early resuscitation. We hypothesized that "subclinical" cardiac dysfunction may nevertheless influence fluid and vasopressor administration during early resuscitation. We retrospectively reviewed prospectically collected data on fluids and vasoconstrictors administered outside the ICU in patients with septic shock resuscitated according to the SSC guidelines that had reached hemodynamic stability without the use of inotropes. All the patients were submitted to transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) hemodynamic monitoring at ICU entry. Subclinical cardiac dysfunction was defined as a TPTD-derived cardiac function index (CFI) ≤ 4.5 min-1.

RESULTS

At ICU admission, subclinical cardiac dysfunction was present in 17/40 patients (42%; CFI 3.6 ± 0.7 min-1 vs 6.6 ± 1.9 min-1; p < 0.01). Compared with patients with normal CFI, these patients had been resuscitate with more fluids (crystalloids 57 ± 10 vs 47 ± 9 ml/kg PBW; p < 0.01) and vasopressors (norepinephrine 0.65 ± 0.25 vs 0.43 ± 0.29 mcg/kg/min; p < 0.05). At ICU admission these patients had lower cardiac index (2.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.6 ± 0.9 L/min/m2, p < 0.01) and higher systemic vascular resistances (2721 ± 860 vs 1532 ± 480 dyn*s*cm-5/m2, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with septic shock resuscitated according to the SSC, we found that subclinical cardiac dysfunction may influence the approach to fluids and vasopressor administration during early resuscitation. Our data support the implementation of early, bedside assessment of cardiac function during early resuscitation of septic shock.

Cardiac output monitoring with pulmonary versus trans-cardiopulmonary thermodilution in left ventricular assist devices: Interchangeable methods?

Cardiac output (CO) measurement is mandatory in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Thermodilution with pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) remains the clinical gold standard to measure CO in these patients, however it is associated with several complications. Therefore, the agreement between PAC and new, minimally invasive monitoring methods in LVAD needs to be further investigated. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of transpulmonary thermodilution with a PiCCO2 monitor compared with pulmonary artery thermodilution with PAC in a LVAD. Continuous-flow LVADs were implanted in six mini-pigs to assist the left ventricle. We studied two methods of measuring CO—intermittent transpulmonary thermodilution (CO_TPTD) by PiCCO2 and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution by CAP, standard technique (CO_PTD)—obtained in four consecutive moments of the study: before starting the LVAD (basal moment), and with the LVAD started in normovolemia, hypervolemia (fluid overloading) and hypovolemia (shock hemorrhage). A total of 72 paired measurements were analysed. At the basal moment, CO_TPTD and CO_PTD were closely correlated (r² = 0.89), with a mean bias of −0.085 ± 0.245 L/min and percentage error of 16%. After 15 min of partial support LVAD, CO_TPTD and CO_PTD were closely correlated (r² = 0.79), with a mean bias of −0.040 ± 0.417 L/min and percentage error of 26%. After inducing hypervolemia, CO_TPTD and CO_PTD were closely correlated (r² = 0.78), with a mean bias of −0.093 ± 0.339 L/min and percentage error of 13%. After inducing hypovolemia, CO_TPTD and CO_PTD were closely correlated (r² = 0.76), with a mean bias of −0.045 ± 0.281 L/min and percentage error of 28%. This study demonstrates a good agreement between transpulmonary thermodilution by PiCCO monitor and pulmonary thermodilution by PAC in the intermittent measurement of CO in a porcine model with a continuous-flow LVAD.

Haemodynamic monitoring in acute heart failure - what you need to know

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a sudden, life-threatening condition, defined as a gradual or rapid onset of symptoms and/or signs of HF. AHF requires urgent medical attention, being the most frequent cause of unplanned hospital admission in patients above 65 years of age. AHF is associated with a 4–12% in-hospital mortality rate and a 21–35% 1-year mortality rate post-discharge. Considering the serious prognosis in AHF patients, it is very important to understand the mechanisms and haemodynamic status in an individual AHF patient, thus preventing end-organ failure and death. Haemodynamic monitoring is a serial assessment of cardiovascular function, intended to detect physiologic abnormalities at the earliest stages, determine which interventions could be most effective, and provide the basis for initiating the most appropriate therapy and evaluate its effects. Over the past decades, haemodynamic monitoring techniques have evolved greatly. Nowadays, they range from very invasive to non-invasive, from intermittent to continuous, and in terms of the provided parameters. Invasive techniques contain pulmonary artery catheterization and transpulmonary thermodilution. Minimally invasive techniques include oesophageal Doppler and noncalibrated pulse wave analysis. Non-invasive techniques contain echocardiography, bioimpedance, and bioreactance techniques as well as non-invasive pulse contour methods. Each of these techniques has specific indications and limitations. In this article, we aimed to provide a pathophysiological explanation of the physical terms and parameters used for haemodynamic monitoring in AHF and to summarize the working principles, advantages, and disadvantages of the currently used methods of haemodynamic monitoring.

[Targeted hemodynamic monitoring in the operating theatre: what for and by what means?]

Goal directed hemodynamic monitoring and the balance in goal directed therapy between adequate fluid/volume therapy and the application of vasoactive or inotropic drugs are the basic elements of modern perioperative therapy.Surgical procedures should be accompanied by as few side effects and complications as possible. Nevertheless, the number of postoperative complications remains surprisingly high, despite of the modern surgical procedures. Anticipation of potential complications in the perioperative period and their rapid treatment build a core competence of anesthesiological action. Thus, it is clear that anesthesia plays a central role in this balancing act.This article aims to provide an overview of the application of the currently available perioperative goal directed hemodynamic monitoring. The current possibilities are discussed by using a case example and an outlook on the future of hemodynamic monitoring is given.

Ultrasound and Other Advanced Hemodynamic Monitoring Techniques in the Intensive Care Unit

The ideal device for hemodynamic monitoring of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) or the operating room has not yet been developed. This would need to be affordable, consistent, have a very low margin of error (<30%), be minimally or noninvasive, and allow the clinician to make a reasonable therapeutic decision that consistently led to better outcomes. Such a device does not yet exist. This article will describe the distinct options we, as critical care physicians, currently possess for this Herculean endeavor.

COVID-19 ARDS is characterized by higher extravascular lung water than non-COVID-19 ARDS: the PiCCOVID study

Background

In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) and pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) measured by transpulmonary thermodilution reflect the degree of lung injury. Whether EVLWi and PVPI are different between non-COVID-19 ARDS and the ARDS due to COVID-19 has never been reported. We aimed at comparing EVLWi, PVPI, respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics in patients with COVID-19 ARDS vs. ARDS of other origin.

Methods

Between March and October 2020, in an observational study conducted in intensive care units from three university hospitals, 60 patients with COVID-19-related ARDS monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution were compared to the 60 consecutive non-COVID-19 ARDS admitted immediately before the COVID-19 outbreak between December 2018 and February 2020.

Results

Driving pressure was similar between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, at baseline as well as during the study period. Compared to patients without COVID-19, those with COVID-19 exhibited higher EVLWi, both at the baseline (17 (14–21) vs. 15 (11–19) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.03) and at the time of its maximal value (24 (18–27) vs. 21 (15–24) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.01). Similar results were observed for PVPI. In COVID-19 patients, the worst ratio between arterial oxygen partial pressure over oxygen inspired fraction was lower (81 (70–109) vs. 100 (80–124) mmHg, respectively, p = 0.02) and prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were more frequently used than in patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 patients had lower maximal lactate level and maximal norepinephrine dose than patients without COVID-19. Day-60 mortality was similar between groups (57% vs. 65%, respectively, p = 0.45). The maximal value of EVLWi and PVPI remained independently associated with outcome in the whole cohort.

Conclusion

Compared to ARDS patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had similar lung mechanics, but higher EVLWi and PVPI values from the beginning of the disease. This was associated with worse oxygenation and with more requirement of prone positioning and ECMO. This is compatible with the specific lung inflammation and severe diffuse alveolar damage related to COVID-19. By contrast, patients with COVID-19 had fewer hemodynamic derangement. Eventually, mortality was similar between groups.

Trial registration number and date of registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04337983). Registered 30 March 2020—Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337983.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03594-6.

Reliability of Pulse Contour Cardiac Output Analysis in a Piglet Model of Multi-step Intra-abdominal Hypertension

BACKGROUND

Pulse contour cardiac output (PCCO) analysis is a minimally invasive technique for continuous cardiac output (CO) measurement monitoring. PCCO requires calibration by transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). Studies showed good agreement between PCCO, TPTD CO and CO measured by pulmonary artery thermodilution (PATD) during stable hemodynamics. However, data are limited in patients with intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH). The objective is to compare the agreement between PCCO, TPTD CO, and PATD CO in a piglet model of multi-step IAH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten female domestic piglets were enrolled in this study. IAH was induced by stepwise carbon dioxide inflation into peritoneal cavity in anesthetized piglets. Following baseline registrations, intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) was increased and maintained at each IAP plateau of 10, 20, 30, and 40 mmHg for 15 min before CO measurements. CO was measured by PATD and simultaneously by 2 femoral artery PCCO catheters. One PCCO catheter was recalibrated by TPTD at each IAP plateau while the other was only calibrated at baseline.

RESULTS

In pooled data of different IAP stages, TPTD CO and recalibrated PCCO (R-PCCO) showed excellent correlation (r² = 0.94 and 0.93) and small bias (-0.09 and -0.09 L/min), respectively, compared with PATD CO. However, PCCO without recalibration (NR-PCCO) were not accurate during IAH (r² = 0.58, bias: +0.32 L/min). When IAP increased to 30 mmHg, NR-PCCO failed to agree with PATD CO (r² = 0.47, bias: +0.52 L/min). On the contrary, a clinically accepted agreement between TPTD CO, R-PCCO, and PATD CO was observed at different IAP stages.

CONCLUSIONS

TPTD CO and R-PCCO agreed with PATD CO in this piglet model of multi-step IAH. On the contrary, NR-PCCO failed to agree with PATD CO when IAP increased to 30 mmHg or more. PCCO analysis needs recalibration in this condition.

Neurogenic pulmonary edema following acute stroke: The progress and perspective

Neurogenic pulmonary edema (NPE) following acute stroke is an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with clinical characteristics that include acute onset, apparent pulmonary interstitial fluid infiltration and rapid resolution. The pathological process of NPE centers on sympathetic stimulation and fulminant release of catecholamines, which cause contraction of resistance vessels. Elevated systemic resistance forces fluid into pulmonary circulation, while pulmonary circulation overload induces pulmonary capillary pressure that elevates, and in turn damages the alveolar capillary barrier. Damage to the alveolar capillary barrier leads to pulmonary ventilation disorder, blood perfusion disorder and oxygenation disorder. Eventually, NPE will cause post-stroke patients' prognosis to further deteriorate. At present, we lack specific biological diagnostic indicators and a meticulously unified diagnostic criterion, and this results in a situation in which many patients are not recognized quickly and/or diagnosed accurately. There are no drugs that are effective against NPE. Therefore, understanding how to diagnose NPE early by identifying the risk factors and how to apply appropriate treatment to avoid a deteriorating prognosis are important scientific goals. We will elaborate the progress of NPE after acute stroke in terms of its pathophysiological mechanisms, etiology, epidemiology, clinical diagnosis and early prediction, comprehensive treatment strategies, and novel drug development. We also propose our own thinking and prospects regarding NPE.

Pulmonary Vascular Permeability Indices: Fine Prints of Lung Protection?

How to cite this article: Choudhary N, Magoon R, Walian A, Kohli JK. Pulmonary Vascular Permeability Indices: Fine Prints of Lung Protection? Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(6):473–474.