| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
|
|
|
|||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Brandon Regional Health Center (Dr. Kramer), Brandon, MB, Canada; the Department of Critical Care Medicine (Drs. Zygun, Easton, and Ferland), Foothills Medical Center, Calgary, AB, Canada; and the Faculty of Medicine (Mr. Hawes), University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Correspondence to: Andreas H. Kramer, MD, Intensive Care Unit, Brandon Regional Health Center, 150 McTavish Ave East, Brandon, MB, R7A 2B3 Canada; e-mail: atkramer{at}mts.net
Study objective: To determine whether the degree of pulse pressure variation (PPV) and systolic pressure variation (SPV) predict an increase in cardiac output (CO) in response to volume challenge in postoperative patients who have undergone coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and to determine whether PPV is superior to SPV in this setting.
Design and setting: This was a prospective clinical study conducted in the cardiovascular ICU of a university hospital.
Patients: Twenty-one patients were studied immediately after arrival in the ICU following CABG.
Intervention: A fluid bolus was administered to all patients.
Measurements: Hemodynamic measurements, including central venous pressure (CVP), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP), CO (thermodilution), percentage of SPV (%SPV), and percentage of PPV (%PPV), were performed shortly after patient arrival in the ICU. Patients were given a rapid 500-mL fluid challenge, after which hemodynamic measurements were repeated. Patients whose CO increased by 
12% were considered to be fluid responders. The ability of different parameters to distinguish between responders and nonresponders was compared.
Results: In response to the volume challenge, 6 patients were responders and 15 were nonresponders. Baseline CVP and PAOP were no different between these two groups. In contrast, the %SPV and the %PPV were significantly higher in responders than in nonresponders. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis suggested that the %PPV was the best predictor of fluid responsiveness. The ideal %PPV threshold for distinguishing responders from nonresponders was found to be 11. A PPV value of 11% predicted an increase in CO with 100% sensitivity and 93% specificity.
Conclusion: PPV and SPV can be used to predict whether or not volume expansion will increase CO in postoperative CABG patients. PPV was superior to SPV at predicting fluid responsiveness. Both of these measures were far superior to CVP and PAOP.
Key Words: cardiac output • preload • pulse pressure variation • systolic pressure variation
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. E. Marik, M. Baram, and B. Vahid Does Central Venous Pressure Predict Fluid Responsiveness?: A Systematic Review of the Literature and the Tale of Seven Mares Chest, July 1, 2008; 134(1): 172 - 178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Durairaj and G. A. Schmidt Fluid Therapy in Resuscitated Sepsis: Less Is More Chest, January 1, 2008; 133(1): 252 - 263. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Solus-Biguenet, M. Fleyfel, B. Tavernier, E. Kipnis, J. Onimus, E. Robin, G. Lebuffe, C. Decoene, F. R. Pruvot, and B. Vallet Non-invasive prediction of fluid responsiveness during major hepatic surgery Br. J. Anaesth., December 1, 2006; 97(6): 808 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Michard Volume Management Using Dynamic Parameters Chest, October 1, 2005; 128(4): 1902 - 1903. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
