23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Comparison of Echocardiographic Indices Used to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in Ventilated Patients

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Assessment of fluid responsiveness relies on dynamic echocardiographic parameters that have not yet been compared in large cohorts.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Relation between respiratory changes in arterial pulse pressure and fluid responsiveness in septic patients with acute circulatory failure.

          In mechanically ventilated patients with acute circulatory failure related to sepsis, we investigated whether the respiratory changes in arterial pressure could be related to the effects of volume expansion (VE) on cardiac index (CI). Forty patients instrumented with indwelling systemic and pulmonary artery catheters were studied before and after VE. Maximal and minimal values of pulse pressure (Pp(max) and Pp(min)) and systolic pressure (Ps(max) and Ps(min)) were determined over one respiratory cycle. The respiratory changes in pulse pressure (DeltaPp) were calculated as the difference between Pp(max) and Pp(min) divided by the mean of the two values and were expressed as a percentage. The respiratory changes in systolic pressure (DeltaPs) were calculated using a similar formula. The VE-induced increase in CI was >/= 15% in 16 patients (responders) and < 15% in 24 patients (nonresponders). Before VE, DeltaPp (24 +/- 9 versus 7 +/- 3%, p < 0.001) and DeltaPs (15 +/- 5 versus 6 +/- 3%, p < 0.001) were higher in responders than in nonresponders. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysis showed that DeltaPp was a more accurate indicator of fluid responsiveness than DeltaPs. Before VE, a DeltaPp value of 13% allowed discrimination between responders and nonresponders with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 96%. VE-induced changes in CI closely correlated with DeltaPp before volume expansion (r(2) = 0. 85, p < 0.001). VE decreased DeltaPp from 14 +/- 10 to 7 +/- 5% (p < 0.001) and VE-induced changes in DeltaPp correlated with VE-induced changes in CI (r(2) = 0.72, p < 0.001). It was concluded that in mechanically ventilated patients with acute circulatory failure related to sepsis, analysis of DeltaPp is a simple method for predicting and assessing the hemodynamic effects of VE, and that DeltaPp is a more reliable indicator of fluid responsiveness than DeltaPs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Fluid challenges in intensive care: the FENICE study

            Background Fluid challenges (FCs) are one of the most commonly used therapies in critically ill patients and represent the cornerstone of hemodynamic management in intensive care units. There are clear benefits and harms from fluid therapy. Limited data on the indication, type, amount and rate of an FC in critically ill patients exist in the literature. The primary aim was to evaluate how physicians conduct FCs in terms of type, volume, and rate of given fluid; the secondary aim was to evaluate variables used to trigger an FC and to compare the proportion of patients receiving further fluid administration based on the response to the FC. Methods This was an observational study conducted in ICUs around the world. Each participating unit entered a maximum of 20 patients with one FC. Results 2213 patients were enrolled and analyzed in the study. The median [interquartile range] amount of fluid given during an FC was 500 ml (500–1000). The median time was 24 min (40–60 min), and the median rate of FC was 1000 [500–1333] ml/h. The main indication for FC was hypotension in 1211 (59 %, CI 57–61 %). In 43 % (CI 41–45 %) of the cases no hemodynamic variable was used. Static markers of preload were used in 785 of 2213 cases (36 %, CI 34–37 %). Dynamic indices of preload responsiveness were used in 483 of 2213 cases (22 %, CI 20–24 %). No safety variable for the FC was used in 72 % (CI 70–74 %) of the cases. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who received further fluids after the FC between those with a positive, with an uncertain or with a negatively judged response. Conclusions The current practice and evaluation of FC in critically ill patients are highly variable. Prediction of fluid responsiveness is not used routinely, safety limits are rarely used, and information from previous failed FCs is not always taken into account. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3850-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              American College of Chest Physicians/La Société de Réanimation de Langue Française statement on competence in critical care ultrasonography.

              To define competence in critical care ultrasonography (CCUS). The statement is sponsored by the Critical Care NetWork of the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) in partnership with La Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF). The ACCP and the SRLF selected a panel of experts to review the field of CCUS and to develop a consensus statement on competence in CCUS. CCUS may be divided into general CCUS (thoracic, abdominal, and vascular), and echocardiography (basic and advanced). For each component part, the panel defined the specific skills that the intensivist should have to be competent in that aspect of CCUS. In defining a reasonable minimum standard for CCUS, the statement serves as a guide for the intensivist to follow in achieving proficiency in the field.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
                Am J Respir Crit Care Med
                American Thoracic Society
                1073-449X
                1535-4970
                April 15 2017
                April 15 2017
                : 195
                : 8
                : 1022-1032
                Article
                10.1164/rccm.201604-0844OC
                27653798
                019927a6-eadc-4682-aca0-85681fb49fa0
                © 2017
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article