Tissue oxygenation parameters to guide fluid therapy

Central Venous-to-Arterial CO2 Difference-Assisted Goal-Directed Hemodynamic Management During Major Surgery-A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Different goals have guided goal-directed therapy (GDT). Protocols aiming for central venous-to-arterial carbon dioxide gap (DCO2) <6 mm Hg have improved organ function in septic shock. Evidence for use of DCO2 in the perioperative period is scarce. We aimed to determine if a GDT protocol using central venous saturation of oxygen (SCvo2) and DCO2 reduced organ dysfunction and intensive care unit (ICU) stay in American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) I and II patients undergoing major surgeries compared to pragmatic goal-directed care.

METHODS

One hundred patients were randomized. Arterial and venous blood-gas values were recorded every 2 hours perioperatively for all patients. Intervention group (GrI) with access to both values was managed per protocol based on DCO2 and SCvo2. Dobutamine infusion 3 to 5 µg/kg/min started if DCO2 >6 mm Hg after correcting all macrocirculatory end points. Control group (GrC) had access only to arterial-gas values and managed per "conventional" goals without DCO2 or SCvo2. Patients were followed for 48 hours after surgery. Organ dysfunction, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores-primary outcome, length of stay in ICU, and duration of postoperative mechanical ventilation and hospital stay were recorded. The patient, surgeons, ICU team, and analyzer were blinded to group allocation.

RESULTS

The groups (44 each) did not significantly differ with respect to baseline characteristics. Perioperative fluids, blood products, and vasopressors used did not significantly differ. The GrI had less organ dysfunction although not significant (79% vs 66%; P = .2). Length of ICU stay in the GrI was significantly less (1.52; standard deviation [SD], 0.82 vs 2.18; SD, 1.08 days; P = .002). Mechanical ventilation duration (0.9 days in intervention versus 0.6 days in control; P = .06) and length of hospital stay did not significantly differ between the groups. Perioperative DCO2 (5.8 vs 8.4 mm Hg; P < .001) and SCvo2 (73.5 vs 68.4 mm Hg; P < .001) were significantly better in the GrI.

CONCLUSIONS

GDT guided by DCO2 did not improve organ function in our cohort. It resulted in greater use of dobutamine, improved tissue oxygen parameters, and decreased length of ICU stay. More evidence is needed for the routine use of DCO2 in sicker patients. In the absence of cardiac output monitors, it may be a readily available, less-expensive, and underutilized parameter for major surgical procedures.

Therapeutic Potential of Hemoglobin Derived from the Marine Worm Arenicola marina (M101): A Literature Review of a Breakthrough Innovation

Oxygen (O₂) is indispensable for aerobic respiration and cellular metabolism. In case of injury, reactive oxygen species are produced, causing oxidative stress, which triggers cell damaging chemical mediators leading to ischemic reperfusion injuries (IRI). Sufficient tissue oxygenation is necessary for optimal wound healing. In this context, several hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers have been developed and tested, especially as graft preservatives for transplant procedures. However, most of the commercially available O₂ carriers increase oxidative stress and show some adverse effects. Interestingly, the hemoglobin derived from the marine lugworm Arenicola marina (M101) has been presented as an efficient therapeutic O₂ carrier with potential anti-inflammatory, anti-bacterial, and antioxidant properties. Furthermore, it has demonstrated promise as a supplement to conventional organ preservatives by reducing IRI. This review summarizes the properties and various applications of M101. M101 is an innovative oxygen carrier with several beneficial therapeutic properties, and further research must be carried out to determine its efficacy in the management of different pathologies.

Toward Intelligent Hemodynamic Monitoring: A Functional Approach

Technology is now available to allow a complete haemodynamic analysis; however this is only used in a small proportion of patients and seems to occur when the medical staff have the time and inclination. As a result of this, significant delays occur between an event, its diagnosis and therefore, any treatment required. We can speculate that we should be able to collect enough real time information to make a complete, real time, haemodynamic diagnosis in all critically ill patients. This article advocates for “intelligent haemodynamic monitoring”. Following the steps of a functional analysis, we answered six basic questions. (1) What is the actual best theoretical model for describing haemodynamic disorders? (2) What are the needed and necessary input/output data for describing this model? (3) What are the specific quality criteria and tolerances for collecting each input variable? (4) Based on these criteria, what are the validated available technologies for monitoring each input variable, continuously, real time, and if possible non-invasively? (5) How can we integrate all the needed reliably monitored input variables into the same system for continuously describing the global haemodynamic model? (6) Is it possible to implement this global model into intelligent programs that are able to differentiate clinically relevant changes as opposed to artificial changes and to display intelligent messages and/or diagnoses?