Accuracy of pulse pressure variations for fluid responsiveness prediction in mechanically ventilated patients with biphasic positive airway pressure mode

被引:0
作者
Benoît Bataille
David Le Moal
Thomas Renault
Pierre Cocquet
Jade de Selle
Stein Silva
机构
[1] Centre Hospitalier de Narbonne,Service de Réanimation Polyvalente
[2] Réanimation URM,undefined
[3] Centre Hospitalier Universitaire,undefined
[4] CHU Purpan,undefined
来源
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing | 2022年 / 36卷
关键词
Measurement techniques—Doppler echocardiography; Heart—myocardial function; Haemodynamics; Fluid therapy; Sepsis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The accuracy of pulse pressure variation (PPV) to predict fluid responsiveness using pressure-controlled (PC) instead of volume-controlled modes is under debate. To specifically address this issue, we designed a study to evaluate the accuracy of PPV to predict fluid responsiveness in severe septic patients who were mechanically ventilated with biphasic positive airway pressure (BIPAP) PC-ventilation mode. 45 patients with sepsis or septic shock and who were mechanically ventilated with BIPAP mode and a target tidal volume of 7–8 ml/kg were included. PPV was automatically assessed at baseline and after a standard fluid challenge (Ringer’s lactate 500 ml). A 15% increase in stroke volume (SV) defined fluid responsiveness. The predictive value of PPV was evaluated through a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and “gray zone” statistical approach. 20 (44%) patients were considered fluid responders. We identified a significant relationship between PPV decrease after volume expansion and SV increase (spearman ρ = − 0.5, p < 0.001). The area under ROC curve for PPV was 0.71 (95%CI 0.56–0.87, p = 0.007). The best cut-off (based on Youden’s index) was 8%, with a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 60%. Using a gray zone approach, we identified that PPV values comprised between 5 and 15% do not allow a reliable fluid responsiveness prediction. In critically ill septic patients ventilated under BIPAP mode, PPV appears to be an accurate method for fluid responsiveness prediction. However, PPV values comprised between 5 and 15% constitute a gray zone that does not allow a reliable fluid responsiveness prediction.
引用
收藏
页码:1479 / 1487
页数:8
相关论文
共 223 条
[1]  
Vallee F(2009)Pulse pressure variations adjusted by alveolar driving pressure to assess fluid responsiveness Intensive Care Med 35 1004-1010
[2]  
Richard JC(2013)Predictive value of pulse pressure variation for fluid responsiveness in septic patients using lung-protective ventilation strategies Br J Anaesth 110 402-408
[3]  
Mari A(2018)Reliability of passive leg raising, stroke volume variation and pulse pressure variation to predict fluid responsiveness during weaning from mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery: a prospective, observational study Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 46 108-115
[4]  
Gallas T(2013)Pulse pressure variation as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients with spontaneous breathing activity: a pragmatic observational study HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth 5 98-109
[5]  
Arsac E(2005)Clinical value of pulse pressure variations in ARDS. Still an unresolved issue? Intensive Care Med 31 499-500
[6]  
Verlaan PS(2009)Automated pulse pressure and stroke volume variations from radial artery: evaluation during major abdominal surgery Br J Anaesth 103 678-684
[7]  
Freitas FG(2008)The ability of a novel algorithm for automatic estimation of the respiratory variations in arterial pulse pressure to monitor fluid responsiveness in the operating room Anesth Analg 106 1195-241
[8]  
Bafi AT(2011)Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of pulse pressure variations for the prediction of fluid responsiveness: a “gray zone” approach Anesthesiology 115 231-160
[9]  
Nascente AP(2017)Ventilation spontanée au cours du syndrome de détresse respiratoire aiguë Méd Intensive Réanim 26 155-1659
[10]  
Assuncao M(2017)Early application of airway pressure release ventilation may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome Intensive Care Med 43 1648-31