{"title":"动态参数预测老年感染性休克患者体液反应性的准确性。","authors":"Sittikorn Paphawin, Pongdhep Theerawit, Detajin Junhasavasdikul, Yuda Sutherasan","doi":"10.2147/IJGM.S517511","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Assessed the accuracy of stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV), and dynamic arterial elastance (Eadyn) in predicting fluid responsiveness (FR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) response in elderly patients with septic shock.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Mechanically ventilated patients aged over 65 with septic shock were enrolled. SVV, PPV, and Eadyn were recorded before and after FR testing (≥10% increase in cardiac output following a passive leg raise test or fluid challenge). MAP responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in MAP post-fluid loading. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to assess predictive parameters such as PPV, SVV for fluid responsiveness, and Eadyn for MAP response after loading. Optimal cutoff values were determined using the Youden index. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. A p-value <0.05 indicated statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age was 76 ± 8 years. Of the 104 patients, 46 were FR-positive. PPV and SVV were higher in FR-positive patients (PPV: 22.07 ± 11.02 vs 9.34 ± 7.39, p < 0.001; SVV: 20 ± 11 vs 9 ± 6, p < 0.001). The AUC was 0.875 for PPV, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.802-0.947, and 0.841 for SVV, 95% CI of 0.757 -0.925. Thresholds of 13.5% for PPV and 11.5% for SVV were found, with 81.8% sensitivity and 87% specificity. MAP responders had higher Eadyn (1.31 ± 0.54 vs 1.01 ± 0.93, p = 0.013). Eadyn showed an AUC of 0.844, with a threshold of 1.00 (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 75%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PV, SVV, and Eadyn are predictors of FR and MAP responsiveness in elderly septic shock patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":14131,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of General Medicine","volume":"18 ","pages":"2333-2342"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12047231/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Accuracy of Dynamic Parameters for Prediction of Fluid Responsiveness in Elderly Patients with Septic Shock.\",\"authors\":\"Sittikorn Paphawin, Pongdhep Theerawit, Detajin Junhasavasdikul, Yuda Sutherasan\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/IJGM.S517511\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Assessed the accuracy of stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV), and dynamic arterial elastance (Eadyn) in predicting fluid responsiveness (FR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) response in elderly patients with septic shock.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Mechanically ventilated patients aged over 65 with septic shock were enrolled. SVV, PPV, and Eadyn were recorded before and after FR testing (≥10% increase in cardiac output following a passive leg raise test or fluid challenge). MAP responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in MAP post-fluid loading. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to assess predictive parameters such as PPV, SVV for fluid responsiveness, and Eadyn for MAP response after loading. Optimal cutoff values were determined using the Youden index. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. A p-value <0.05 indicated statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age was 76 ± 8 years. Of the 104 patients, 46 were FR-positive. PPV and SVV were higher in FR-positive patients (PPV: 22.07 ± 11.02 vs 9.34 ± 7.39, p < 0.001; SVV: 20 ± 11 vs 9 ± 6, p < 0.001). The AUC was 0.875 for PPV, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.802-0.947, and 0.841 for SVV, 95% CI of 0.757 -0.925. Thresholds of 13.5% for PPV and 11.5% for SVV were found, with 81.8% sensitivity and 87% specificity. MAP responders had higher Eadyn (1.31 ± 0.54 vs 1.01 ± 0.93, p = 0.013). Eadyn showed an AUC of 0.844, with a threshold of 1.00 (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 75%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PV, SVV, and Eadyn are predictors of FR and MAP responsiveness in elderly septic shock patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of General Medicine\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"2333-2342\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12047231/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of General Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S517511\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of General Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S517511","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价脑卒中容积变化(SVV)、脉压变化(PPV)和动态动脉弹性(Eadyn)预测老年感染性休克患者液体反应性(FR)和平均动脉压(MAP)反应的准确性。患者和方法:65岁以上的感染性休克机械通气患者。在FR检测前后分别记录SVV、PPV和Eadyn(被动抬腿试验或液体刺激后心排血量增加≥10%)。MAP反应性定义为流体加载后MAP增加≥10%。构建受者工作特征曲线以评估预测参数,如PPV、SVV(流体响应)和Eadyn(加载后MAP响应)。利用约登指数确定最佳临界值。计算灵敏度、特异度和曲线下面积(AUC)。A p值结果:平均年龄76±8岁。在104例患者中,46例为fr阳性。fr阳性患者PPV和SVV较高(PPV: 22.07±11.02 vs 9.34±7.39,p < 0.001;SVV: 20±11 vs 9±6,p < 0.001)。PPV的AUC为0.875,95%可信区间(CI)为0.802 ~ 0.947;SVV的AUC为0.841,95% CI为0.757 ~ 0.925。PPV的阈值为13.5%,SVV的阈值为11.5%,敏感性为81.8%,特异性为87%。MAP应答者的Eadyn较高(1.31±0.54 vs 1.01±0.93,p = 0.013)。Eadyn的AUC为0.844,阈值为1.00(敏感性85.7%,特异性75%)。结论:PV、SVV和Eadyn是老年感染性休克患者FR和MAP反应性的预测因子。
The Accuracy of Dynamic Parameters for Prediction of Fluid Responsiveness in Elderly Patients with Septic Shock.
Purpose: Assessed the accuracy of stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV), and dynamic arterial elastance (Eadyn) in predicting fluid responsiveness (FR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) response in elderly patients with septic shock.
Patients and methods: Mechanically ventilated patients aged over 65 with septic shock were enrolled. SVV, PPV, and Eadyn were recorded before and after FR testing (≥10% increase in cardiac output following a passive leg raise test or fluid challenge). MAP responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in MAP post-fluid loading. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to assess predictive parameters such as PPV, SVV for fluid responsiveness, and Eadyn for MAP response after loading. Optimal cutoff values were determined using the Youden index. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. A p-value <0.05 indicated statistical significance.
Results: The mean age was 76 ± 8 years. Of the 104 patients, 46 were FR-positive. PPV and SVV were higher in FR-positive patients (PPV: 22.07 ± 11.02 vs 9.34 ± 7.39, p < 0.001; SVV: 20 ± 11 vs 9 ± 6, p < 0.001). The AUC was 0.875 for PPV, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.802-0.947, and 0.841 for SVV, 95% CI of 0.757 -0.925. Thresholds of 13.5% for PPV and 11.5% for SVV were found, with 81.8% sensitivity and 87% specificity. MAP responders had higher Eadyn (1.31 ± 0.54 vs 1.01 ± 0.93, p = 0.013). Eadyn showed an AUC of 0.844, with a threshold of 1.00 (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 75%).
Conclusion: PV, SVV, and Eadyn are predictors of FR and MAP responsiveness in elderly septic shock patients.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of General Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on general and internal medicine, pathogenesis, epidemiology, diagnosis, monitoring and treatment protocols. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original research and clinical studies across all disease areas.
A key focus of the journal is the elucidation of disease processes and management protocols resulting in improved outcomes for the patient. Patient perspectives such as satisfaction, quality of life, health literacy and communication and their role in developing new healthcare programs and optimizing clinical outcomes are major areas of interest for the journal.
As of 1st April 2019, the International Journal of General Medicine will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.