Casey R. Storms, Tristan Bice, Jimmy Zhang, Elizabeth Levy, Tetsuro Maeda, Neha Kumar, Lijo C. Illipparambil, Amy M. K. Rovitelli, Heather Clark, Orren Wexler, Michelle Malnoske, Christina Dony, Alex Z. Fe, Rebecca Shultz, Anthony P. Pietropaoli
{"title":"Ultrasound-measured brachial artery reactive hyperemia in critically ill patients: an observational study","authors":"Casey R. Storms, Tristan Bice, Jimmy Zhang, Elizabeth Levy, Tetsuro Maeda, Neha Kumar, Lijo C. Illipparambil, Amy M. K. Rovitelli, Heather Clark, Orren Wexler, Michelle Malnoske, Christina Dony, Alex Z. Fe, Rebecca Shultz, Anthony P. Pietropaoli","doi":"10.1186/s13054-025-05646-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ultrasound-measured brachial artery reactive hyperemia (RH) is independently predictive of hospital mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis. Its association with mortality is uncertain in critically ill patients in general. This was a combined case-control and prospective cohort study. Ultrasound was used to measure brachial artery reactive hyperemia in 150 critically ill patients at a single academic medical center and in 44 control subjects without acute illness. Measurements were compared in cases versus controls, septic vs. non-septic critically ill patients, and hospital survivors vs. non-survivors. Follow-up measurements were obtained 3–5 days later in a sub-sample of patients. RH was calculated as the percent change in pre- vs. post-ischemic brachial artery velocity-time integral measured by Doppler ultrasound. RH was impaired in critically ill compared to control subjects (194 [179–210] vs. 369 [314–433]%, p < 0.001; results expressed as mean [95% confidence interval]) but similar in septic compared to non-septic patients (196 [177–217] vs. 199 [170–233], p = 0.88). RH was significantly lower in hospital non-survivors compared to survivors (144 [120–173] vs. 204 [187–222], p = 0.003). Multivariable analysis showed that the difference between survivors and non-survivors was not confounded by age or comorbidities (odds ratio for hospital death = 0.26 per log unit rise in RH, 95% confidence interval = 0.08–0.83, p = 0.02). The magnitude of RH improved over 3–5 days in hospital survivors (n = 63, 204 [180–232] vs. 239 [208–275], p = 0.02), but did not change in non-survivors (n = 11, 133 [107–165] vs. 128 [75–220]. Reactive hyperemia of the brachial artery is impaired in undifferentiated critically ill patients, lower in non-survivors compared to survivors, and independently associated with hospital mortality. Brachial artery reactive hyperemia improves significantly over time in survivors but not in non-survivors. ","PeriodicalId":10811,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05646-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Ultrasound-measured brachial artery reactive hyperemia (RH) is independently predictive of hospital mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis. Its association with mortality is uncertain in critically ill patients in general. This was a combined case-control and prospective cohort study. Ultrasound was used to measure brachial artery reactive hyperemia in 150 critically ill patients at a single academic medical center and in 44 control subjects without acute illness. Measurements were compared in cases versus controls, septic vs. non-septic critically ill patients, and hospital survivors vs. non-survivors. Follow-up measurements were obtained 3–5 days later in a sub-sample of patients. RH was calculated as the percent change in pre- vs. post-ischemic brachial artery velocity-time integral measured by Doppler ultrasound. RH was impaired in critically ill compared to control subjects (194 [179–210] vs. 369 [314–433]%, p < 0.001; results expressed as mean [95% confidence interval]) but similar in septic compared to non-septic patients (196 [177–217] vs. 199 [170–233], p = 0.88). RH was significantly lower in hospital non-survivors compared to survivors (144 [120–173] vs. 204 [187–222], p = 0.003). Multivariable analysis showed that the difference between survivors and non-survivors was not confounded by age or comorbidities (odds ratio for hospital death = 0.26 per log unit rise in RH, 95% confidence interval = 0.08–0.83, p = 0.02). The magnitude of RH improved over 3–5 days in hospital survivors (n = 63, 204 [180–232] vs. 239 [208–275], p = 0.02), but did not change in non-survivors (n = 11, 133 [107–165] vs. 128 [75–220]. Reactive hyperemia of the brachial artery is impaired in undifferentiated critically ill patients, lower in non-survivors compared to survivors, and independently associated with hospital mortality. Brachial artery reactive hyperemia improves significantly over time in survivors but not in non-survivors.
期刊介绍:
Critical Care is an esteemed international medical journal that undergoes a rigorous peer-review process to maintain its high quality standards. Its primary objective is to enhance the healthcare services offered to critically ill patients. To achieve this, the journal focuses on gathering, exchanging, disseminating, and endorsing evidence-based information that is highly relevant to intensivists. By doing so, Critical Care seeks to provide a thorough and inclusive examination of the intensive care field.