The haemodynamic effects of crystalloid and colloid volume resuscitation on primary, derived and efficiency variables in post-CABG patients

Venous return physiology applied to post-cardiac arrest haemodynamic management: a post hoc analysis of the NEUROPROTECT trial

BACKGROUND

The European Resuscitation Council 2021 guidelines for haemodynamic monitoring and management during post-resuscitation care from cardiac arrest call for an individualised approach to therapeutic interventions. Combining the cardiac function and venous return curves with the inclusion of the mean systemic filling pressure enables a physiological illustration of intravascular volume, vasoconstriction and inotropy. An analogue mean systemic filling pressure (Pmsa) may be calculated once cardiac output, mean arterial and central venous pressure are known. The NEUROPROTECT trial compared targeting a mean arterial pressure of 65 mmHg (standard) versus an early goal directed haemodynamic optimisation targeting 85 mmHg (high) in ICU for 36 h after cardiac arrest. The trial data were used in this study to calculate post hoc Pmsa and its expanded variables to comprehensively describe venous return physiology during post-cardiac arrest management. A general estimating equation model was used to analyse continuous variables split by standard and high mean arterial pressure groups.

RESULTS

Data from 52 patients in each group were analysed. The driving pressure for venous return, and thus cardiac output, was higher in the high MAP group (p < 0.001) along with a numerically increased estimated stressed intravascular volume (mean difference 0.27 [- 0.014-0.55] L, p = 0.06). The heart efficiency was comparable (p = 0.43) in both the standard and high MAP target groups, suggesting that inotropy was similar despite increased arterial load in the high MAP group (p = 0.01). The efficiency of fluid boluses to increase cardiac output was increased in the higher MAP compared to standard MAP group (mean difference 0.26 [0.08-0.43] fraction units, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Calculation of the analogue mean systemic filling pressure and expanded variables using haemodynamic data from the NEUROPROTECT trial demonstrated an increased venous return, and thus cardiac output, as well as increased volume responsiveness associated with targeting a higher MAP. Further studies of the analogue mean systemic filling pressure and its derived variables are warranted to individualise post-resuscitation care and evaluate any clinical benefit associated with this monitoring approach.

Analogue Mean Systemic Filling Pressure: a New Volume Management Approach During Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy

The absence of an accepted gold standard to estimate volume status is an obstacle for optimal management of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). The applicability of the analogue mean systemic filling pressure (Pmsa) as a surrogate of the mean circulatory pressure to estimate volume status for patients with LVADs has not been investigated. Variability of flows generated by the Impella CP, a temporary LVAD, should have no physiological impact on fluid status. This translational interventional ovine study demonstrated that Pmsa did not change with variable circulatory flows induced by a continuous flow LVAD (the average dynamic increase in Pmsa of 0.20 ± 0.95 mmHg from zero to maximal Impella flow was not significant (p = 0.68)), confirming applicability of the human Pmsa equation for an ovine LVAD model. The study opens new directions for future translational and human investigations of fluid management using Pmsa for patients with temporary LVADs.

Feasibility to estimate mean systemic filling pressure with inspiratory holds at the bedside

Background: A decade ago, it became possible to derive mean systemic filling pressure (MSFP) at the bedside using the inspiratory hold maneuver. MSFP has the potential to help guide hemodynamic care, but the estimation is not yet implemented in common clinical practice. In this study, we assessed the ability of MSFP, vascular compliance (Csys), and stressed volume (Vs) to track fluid boluses. Second, we assessed the feasibility of implementation of MSFP in the intensive care unit (ICU). Exploratory, a potential difference in MSFP response between colloids and crystalloids was assessed. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study in adult patients admitted to the ICU after cardiac surgery. The MSFP was determined using 3-4 inspiratory holds with incremental pressures (maximum 35 cm H₂O) to construct a venous return curve. Two fluid boluses were administered: 100 and 500 ml, enabling to calculate Vs and Csys. Patients were randomized to crystalloid or colloid fluid administration. Trained ICU consultants acted as study supervisors, and protocol deviations were recorded. Results: A total of 20 patients completed the trial. MSFP was able to track the 500 ml bolus (p < 0.001). In 16 patients (80%), Vs and Csys could be determined. Vs had a median of 2029 ml (IQR 1605-3164), and Csys had a median of 73 ml mmHg^-1 (IQR 56-133). A difference in response between crystalloids and colloids was present for the 100 ml fluid bolus (p = 0.019) and in a post hoc analysis, also for the 500 ml bolus (p = 0.010). Conclusion: MSFP can be measured at the bedside and provides insights into the hemodynamic status of a patient that are currently missing. The clinical feasibility of Vs and Csys was judged ambiguously based on the lack of required hemodynamic stability. Future studies should address the clinical obstacles found in this study, and less-invasive alternatives to determine MSFP should be further explored. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03139929.

Volume status and volume responsiveness in postoperative cardiac surgical patients: An observational, multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

The best strategy to identify patients in whom fluid loading increases cardiac output (CO) following cardiac surgery remains debated. This study examined the utility of a calculated mean systemic filling pressure analogue (P_msa ) and derived variables to explain the response to a fluid bolus.

METHODS

The P_msa was calculated using retrospective, observational cohort data in the early postoperative period between admission to the intensive care unit and extubation within 6 hours. The venous return pressure gradient (VRdP) was calculated as P_msa  - central venous pressure. Concurrent changes induced by a fluid bolus in the ratio of the VRdP over P_msa , the volume efficiency (E_vol ), were studied to assess fluid responsiveness. Changes between P_msa and derived variables and CO were analysed by Wilcoxon rank-sum test, hierarchial clustering and multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

Data were analysed for 235 patients who received 489 fluid boluses. The P_msa increased with consecutive fluid boluses (median difference [range] 1.3 [0.5-2.4] mm Hg, P = .03) with a corresponding increase in VRdP (median difference 0.4 [0.2-0.6] mm Hg, P = .04). Hierarchical cluster analysis only identified E_vol and the change in CO within one cluster. The multiple linear regression between P_msa and its derived variables and the change in CO (overall r²  = .48, P < .001) demonstrated the best partial regression between the continuous change in CO and the concurrent E_vol (r = .55, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The mean systemic filling P_msa enabled a comprehensive interpretation of fluid responsiveness with volume efficiency useful to explain the change in CO as a continuous phenomenon.