Assessment of fluid responsiveness after tidal volume challenge in renal transplant recipients: a nonrandomized prospective interventional study.

Clinical transplantation and research Pub Date : 2024-09-30 Epub Date: 2024-09-09 DOI:10.4285/ctr.24.0025
Ganesh Ramaji Nimje, Vipin Kumar Goyal, Pankaj Singh, Praveenkumar Shekhrajka, Akash Mishra, Saurabh Mittal
{"title":"Assessment of fluid responsiveness after tidal volume challenge in renal transplant recipients: a nonrandomized prospective interventional study.","authors":"Ganesh Ramaji Nimje, Vipin Kumar Goyal, Pankaj Singh, Praveenkumar Shekhrajka, Akash Mishra, Saurabh Mittal","doi":"10.4285/ctr.24.0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When applying lung-protective ventilation, fluid responsiveness cannot be predicted by pulse pressure variation (PPV) or stroke volume variation (SVV). Functional hemodynamic testing may help address this limitation. This study examined whether changes in dynamic indices such as PPV and SVV, induced by tidal volume challenge (TVC), can reliably predict fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing renal transplantation who receive lung-protective ventilation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This nonrandomized interventional study included renal transplant recipients with end-stage renal disease. Patients received ventilation with a 6 mL/kg tidal volume (TV), and the FloTrac system was attached for continuous hemodynamic monitoring. Participants were classified as responders or nonresponders based on whether fluid challenge increased the stroke volume index by more than 10%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 36 patients, of whom 19 (52.8%) were responders and 17 (47.2%) were nonresponders. Among responders, the mean ΔPPV<sub>6-8</sub> (calculated as PPV at a TV of 8 mL/kg predicted body weight [PBW] minus that at 6 mL/kg PBW) was 3.32±0.75 and ΔSVV<sub>6-8</sub> was 2.58±0.77, compared to 0.82±0.53 and 0.70±0.92 for nonresponders, respectively. ΔPPV<sub>6-8</sub> exhibited an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.00; P≤0.001), with an optimal cutoff value of 1.5, sensitivity of 94.7%, and specificity of 94.1%. ΔSVV<sub>6-8</sub> displayed an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.84-1.00; P≤0.001) at the same cutoff value of 1.5, with a sensitivity of 94.7% and a specificity of 76.5%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TVC-induced changes in PPV and SVV are predictive of fluid responsiveness in renal transplant recipients who receive intraoperative lung-protective ventilation.</p>","PeriodicalId":519901,"journal":{"name":"Clinical transplantation and research","volume":" ","pages":"188-196"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11464152/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical transplantation and research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4285/ctr.24.0025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: When applying lung-protective ventilation, fluid responsiveness cannot be predicted by pulse pressure variation (PPV) or stroke volume variation (SVV). Functional hemodynamic testing may help address this limitation. This study examined whether changes in dynamic indices such as PPV and SVV, induced by tidal volume challenge (TVC), can reliably predict fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing renal transplantation who receive lung-protective ventilation.

Methods: This nonrandomized interventional study included renal transplant recipients with end-stage renal disease. Patients received ventilation with a 6 mL/kg tidal volume (TV), and the FloTrac system was attached for continuous hemodynamic monitoring. Participants were classified as responders or nonresponders based on whether fluid challenge increased the stroke volume index by more than 10%.

Results: The analysis included 36 patients, of whom 19 (52.8%) were responders and 17 (47.2%) were nonresponders. Among responders, the mean ΔPPV6-8 (calculated as PPV at a TV of 8 mL/kg predicted body weight [PBW] minus that at 6 mL/kg PBW) was 3.32±0.75 and ΔSVV6-8 was 2.58±0.77, compared to 0.82±0.53 and 0.70±0.92 for nonresponders, respectively. ΔPPV6-8 exhibited an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.00; P≤0.001), with an optimal cutoff value of 1.5, sensitivity of 94.7%, and specificity of 94.1%. ΔSVV6-8 displayed an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.84-1.00; P≤0.001) at the same cutoff value of 1.5, with a sensitivity of 94.7% and a specificity of 76.5%.

Conclusions: TVC-induced changes in PPV and SVV are predictive of fluid responsiveness in renal transplant recipients who receive intraoperative lung-protective ventilation.

肾移植受者潮气量挑战后的液体反应性评估:一项非随机前瞻性干预研究。
背景:在应用肺保护性通气时,无法通过脉压变化(PPV)或每搏容量变化(SVV)来预测输液反应性。功能性血液动力学测试有助于解决这一局限性。本研究探讨了潮气量挑战(TVC)引起的 PPV 和 SVV 等动态指标的变化是否能可靠地预测接受肺保护性通气的肾移植患者的液体反应性:这项非随机干预研究包括患有终末期肾病的肾移植受者。患者接受 6 毫升/千克潮气量(TV)通气,并连接 FloTrac 系统进行持续血液动力学监测。根据液体挑战是否使每搏量指数增加超过 10%,将参与者分为有反应者和无反应者:分析包括 36 名患者,其中 19 人(52.8%)有反应,17 人(47.2%)无反应。在有反应者中,ΔPPV6-8(以 8 毫升/千克预测体重 [PBW] 时的 PPV 减去 6 毫升/千克预测体重 [PBW] 时的 PPV 计算)的平均值为 3.32±0.75,ΔSVV6-8 为 2.58±0.77,而无反应者的平均值分别为 0.82±0.53 和 0.70±0.92。ΔPPV6-8的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.97(95% 置信区间 [CI],0.93-1.00;P≤0.001),最佳临界值为1.5,灵敏度为94.7%,特异性为94.1%。ΔSVV6-8的AUC为0.93(95% CI,0.84-1.00;P≤0.001),临界值同样为1.5,灵敏度为94.7%,特异性为76.5%:结论:TVC 引起的 PPV 和 SVV 变化可预测接受术中肺保护通气的肾移植受者对输液的反应性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信