Ventilator-induced central venous pressure variation can predict fluid responsiveness in post-operative cardiac surgery patients

Diagnostic accuracy of the peripheral venous pressure variation induced by an alveolar recruitment maneuver to predict fluid responsiveness during high-risk abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing high-risk surgery, it is recommended to titrate fluid administration using stroke volume or a dynamic variable of fluid responsiveness (FR). However, this strategy usually requires the use of a hemodynamic monitor and/or an arterial catheter. Recently, it has been shown that variations of central venous pressure (ΔCVP) during an alveolar recruitment maneuver (ARM) can predict FR and that there is a correlation between CVP and peripheral venous pressure (PVP). This prospective study tested the hypothesis that variations of PVP (ΔPVP) induced by an ARM could predict FR.

METHODS

We studied 60 consecutive patients scheduled for high-risk abdominal surgery, excluding those with preoperative cardiac arrhythmias or right ventricular dysfunction. All patients had a peripheral venous catheter, a central venous catheter and a radial arterial catheter linked to a pulse contour monitoring device. PVP was always measured via an 18-gauge catheter inserted at the antecubital fossa. Then an ARM consisting of a standardized gas insufflation to reach a plateau of 30 cmH₂O for 30 s was performed before skin incision. Invasive mean arterial pressure (MAP), pulse pressure, heart rate, CVP, PVP, pulse pressure variation (PPV), and stroke volume index (SVI) were recorded before ARM (T1), at the end of ARM (T2), before volume expansion (T3), and one minute after volume expansion (T4). Receiver-operating curves (ROC) analysis with the corresponding grey zone approach were performed to assess the ability of ∆PVP (index test) to predict FR, defined as an ≥ 10% increase in SVI following the administration of a 4 ml/kg balanced crystalloid solution over 5 min.

RESULTS

∆PVP during ARM predicted FR with an area under the ROC curve of 0.76 (95%CI, 0.63 to 0.86). The optimal threshold determined by the Youden Index was a ∆PVP value of 5 mmHg (95%CI, 4 to 6) with a sensitivity of 66% (95%CI, 47 to 81) and a specificity of 82% (95%CI, 63 to 94). The AUC's for predicting FR were not different between ΔPVP, ΔCVP, and PPV.

CONCLUSION

During high-risk abdominal surgery, ∆PVP induced by an ARM can moderately predict FR. Nevertheless, other hemodynamic variables did not perform better.

Right ventricular and pulmonary artery pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation for the prediction of fluid responsiveness: an interventional study in coronary artery bypass 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 (PPV_RV) and systolic pressure variation (SPV_RV) as well as pulmonary artery pulse pressure variation (PPV_PA) and systolic pressure variation (SPV_PA) to predict fluid responsiveness in coronary artery bypass (CABG) surgery patients. Additionally, radial artery pulse pressure variation (PPV_ART) and systolic pressure variation (SPV_ART) 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 PPV_RV, 0.63 (95%-CI 0.43 to 0.83) for SPV_RV, 0.58 (95%-CI 0.38 to 0.78) for PPV_PA, and 0.71 (95%-CI 0.52 to 0.89) for SPV_PA. The AUROC for PPV_ART was 0.71 (95%-CI 0.53 to 0.89) and for SPV_ART 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.

Predictors of fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients mechanically ventilated at low tidal volumes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Dynamic predictors of fluid responsiveness have shown good performance in mechanically ventilated patients at tidal volumes (Vt) > 8 mL kg⁻¹. Nevertheless, most critically ill conditions demand lower Vt. We sought to evaluate the operative performance of several predictors of fluid responsiveness at Vt ≤ 8 mL kg⁻¹ by using meta-regression and subgroup analyses.

Methods

A sensitive search was conducted in the Embase and MEDLINE databases. We searched for studies prospectively assessing the operative performance of pulse pressure variation (PPV), stroke volume variation (SVV), end-expiratory occlusion test (EEOT), passive leg raising (PLR), inferior vena cava respiratory variability (Δ-IVC), mini-fluid challenge (m-FC), and tidal volume challenge (VtC), to predict fluid responsiveness in adult patients mechanically ventilated at Vt ≤ 8 ml kg⁻¹, without respiratory effort and arrhythmias, published between 1999 and 2020. Operative performance was assessed using hierarchical and bivariate analyses, while subgroup analysis was used to evaluate variations in their operative performance and sources of heterogeneity. A sensitivity analysis based on the methodological quality of the studies included (QUADAS-2) was also performed.

Results

A total of 33 studies involving 1,352 patients were included for analysis. Areas under the curve (AUC) values for predictors of fluid responsiveness were: for PPV = 0.82, Δ-IVC = 0.86, SVV = 0.90, m-FC = 0.84, PLR = 0.84, EEOT = 0.92, and VtC = 0.92. According to subgroup analyses, variations in methods to measure cardiac output and in turn, to classify patients as responders or non-responders significantly influence the performance of PPV and SVV (p < 0.05). Operative performance of PPV was also significantly affected by the compliance of the respiratory system (p = 0.05), while type of patient (p < 0.01) and thresholds used to determine responsiveness significantly affected the predictability of SVV (p = 0.05). Similarly, volume of fluids infused to determine variation in cardiac output, significantly affected the performance of SVV (p = 0.01) and PLR (p < 0.01). Sensitivity analysis showed no variations in operative performance of PPV (p = 0.39), SVV (p = 0.23) and EEOT (p = 0.15).

Conclusion

Most predictors of fluid responsiveness reliably predict the response of cardiac output to volume expansion in adult patients mechanically ventilated at tidal volumes ≤ 8 ml kg⁻¹. Nevertheless, technical and clinical variables might clearly influence on their operative performance

Predictors of fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients mechanically ventilated at low tidal volumes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Dynamic predictors of fluid responsiveness have shown good performance in mechanically ventilated patients at tidal volumes (Vt) > 8 mL kg−1. Nevertheless, most critically ill conditions demand lower Vt. We sought to evaluate the operative performance of several predictors of fluid responsiveness at Vt ≤ 8 mL kg−1 by using meta-regression and subgroup analyses.

Methods

A sensitive search was conducted in the Embase and MEDLINE databases. We searched for studies prospectively assessing the operative performance of pulse pressure variation (PPV), stroke volume variation (SVV), end-expiratory occlusion test (EEOT), passive leg raising (PLR), inferior vena cava respiratory variability (Δ-IVC), mini-fluid challenge (m-FC), and tidal volume challenge (VtC), to predict fluid responsiveness in adult patients mechanically ventilated at Vt ≤ 8 ml kg−1, without respiratory effort and arrhythmias, published between 1999 and 2020. Operative performance was assessed using hierarchical and bivariate analyses, while subgroup analysis was used to evaluate variations in their operative performance and sources of heterogeneity. A sensitivity analysis based on the methodological quality of the studies included (QUADAS-2) was also performed.

Results

A total of 33 studies involving 1,352 patients were included for analysis. Areas under the curve (AUC) values for predictors of fluid responsiveness were: for PPV = 0.82, Δ-IVC = 0.86, SVV = 0.90, m-FC = 0.84, PLR = 0.84, EEOT = 0.92, and VtC = 0.92. According to subgroup analyses, variations in methods to measure cardiac output and in turn, to classify patients as responders or non-responders significantly influence the performance of PPV and SVV (p < 0.05). Operative performance of PPV was also significantly affected by the compliance of the respiratory system (p = 0.05), while type of patient (p < 0.01) and thresholds used to determine responsiveness significantly affected the predictability of SVV (p = 0.05). Similarly, volume of fluids infused to determine variation in cardiac output, significantly affected the performance of SVV (p = 0.01) and PLR (p < 0.01). Sensitivity analysis showed no variations in operative performance of PPV (p = 0.39), SVV (p = 0.23) and EEOT (p = 0.15).

Conclusion

Most predictors of fluid responsiveness reliably predict the response of cardiac output to volume expansion in adult patients mechanically ventilated at tidal volumes ≤ 8 ml kg−1. Nevertheless, technical and clinical variables might clearly influence on their operative performance