Miguel Á Ibarra-Estrada, José A López-Pulgarín, Julio C Mijangos-Méndez, José L Díaz-Gómez, Guadalupe Aguirre-Avalos
{"title":"颈动脉峰值收缩速度的呼吸变化预测感染性休克机械通气患者的容量反应性:一项前瞻性队列研究。","authors":"Miguel Á Ibarra-Estrada, José A López-Pulgarín, Julio C Mijangos-Méndez, José L Díaz-Gómez, Guadalupe Aguirre-Avalos","doi":"10.1186/s13089-015-0029-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The evaluation of fluid responsiveness in patients with hemodynamic instability remains to be challenging. This investigation aimed to determine whether respiratory variation in carotid Doppler peak velocity (ΔCDPV) predicts fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock and lung protective mechanical ventilation with a tidal volume of 6 ml/kg.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a prospective cohort study at an intensive care unit, studying the effect of 59 fluid challenges on 19 mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock. Pre-fluid challenge ΔCDPV and other static or dynamic measurements were obtained. Fluid challenge responders were defined as patients whose stroke volume index increased more than 15 % on transpulmonary thermodilution. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was compared for each predictive parameter.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fluid responsiveness rate was 51 %. The ΔCDPV had an AUROC of 0.88 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.95); followed by stroke volume variation (0.72, 95 % CI 0.63-0.88), passive leg raising (0.69, 95 % CI 0.56-0.80), and pulse pressure variation (0.63, 95 % CI 0.49-0.75). The ΔCDPV was a statistically significant superior predictor when compared with the other parameters. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were also the highest for ΔCDPV, with an optimal cutoff at 14 %. There was good correlation between ΔCDPV and SVI increment after the fluid challenge (r = 0.84; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ΔCDPV can be more accurate than other methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock receiving lung protective mechanical ventilation. ΔCDPV also has a high correlation with SVI increase after fluid challenge.</p>","PeriodicalId":46598,"journal":{"name":"Critical Ultrasound Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13089-015-0029-1","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Respiratory variation in carotid peak systolic velocity predicts volume responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock: a prospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Á Ibarra-Estrada, José A López-Pulgarín, Julio C Mijangos-Méndez, José L Díaz-Gómez, Guadalupe Aguirre-Avalos\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13089-015-0029-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The evaluation of fluid responsiveness in patients with hemodynamic instability remains to be challenging. This investigation aimed to determine whether respiratory variation in carotid Doppler peak velocity (ΔCDPV) predicts fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock and lung protective mechanical ventilation with a tidal volume of 6 ml/kg.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a prospective cohort study at an intensive care unit, studying the effect of 59 fluid challenges on 19 mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock. Pre-fluid challenge ΔCDPV and other static or dynamic measurements were obtained. Fluid challenge responders were defined as patients whose stroke volume index increased more than 15 % on transpulmonary thermodilution. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was compared for each predictive parameter.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fluid responsiveness rate was 51 %. The ΔCDPV had an AUROC of 0.88 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.95); followed by stroke volume variation (0.72, 95 % CI 0.63-0.88), passive leg raising (0.69, 95 % CI 0.56-0.80), and pulse pressure variation (0.63, 95 % CI 0.49-0.75). The ΔCDPV was a statistically significant superior predictor when compared with the other parameters. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were also the highest for ΔCDPV, with an optimal cutoff at 14 %. There was good correlation between ΔCDPV and SVI increment after the fluid challenge (r = 0.84; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ΔCDPV can be more accurate than other methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock receiving lung protective mechanical ventilation. ΔCDPV also has a high correlation with SVI increase after fluid challenge.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Ultrasound Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13089-015-0029-1\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Ultrasound Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-015-0029-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/6/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Ultrasound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-015-0029-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34
摘要
背景:血流动力学不稳定患者的液体反应性评价仍然具有挑战性。本研究旨在确定颈动脉多普勒峰值速度(ΔCDPV)的呼吸变化是否能预测感染性休克和潮气量为6 ml/kg的肺保护性机械通气患者的液体反应性。方法:我们在重症监护室进行了一项前瞻性队列研究,研究了59种液体挑战对19例机械通气脓毒性休克患者的影响。获得了流体前挑战ΔCDPV和其他静态或动态测量结果。液体冲击应答者定义为经肺热稀释后脑卒中容量指数增加15%以上的患者。比较各预测参数的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)。结果:液体反应率为51%。ΔCDPV的AUROC为0.88(95%置信区间(CI) 0.77 ~ 0.95);其次是卒中容积变化(0.72,95% CI 0.63-0.88)、被动抬腿(0.69,95% CI 0.56-0.80)和脉压变化(0.63,95% CI 0.49-0.75)。与其他参数相比,ΔCDPV是一个具有统计学意义的优越预测因子。ΔCDPV的敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值也最高,最佳临界值为14%。流体冲击后ΔCDPV与SVI增量有良好的相关性(r = 0.84;P < 0.001)。结论:ΔCDPV比其他方法更能准确评估接受肺保护性机械通气的脓毒性休克患者的液体反应性。ΔCDPV也与液体刺激后SVI升高高度相关。
Respiratory variation in carotid peak systolic velocity predicts volume responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock: a prospective cohort study.
Background: The evaluation of fluid responsiveness in patients with hemodynamic instability remains to be challenging. This investigation aimed to determine whether respiratory variation in carotid Doppler peak velocity (ΔCDPV) predicts fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock and lung protective mechanical ventilation with a tidal volume of 6 ml/kg.
Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study at an intensive care unit, studying the effect of 59 fluid challenges on 19 mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock. Pre-fluid challenge ΔCDPV and other static or dynamic measurements were obtained. Fluid challenge responders were defined as patients whose stroke volume index increased more than 15 % on transpulmonary thermodilution. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was compared for each predictive parameter.
Results: Fluid responsiveness rate was 51 %. The ΔCDPV had an AUROC of 0.88 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.95); followed by stroke volume variation (0.72, 95 % CI 0.63-0.88), passive leg raising (0.69, 95 % CI 0.56-0.80), and pulse pressure variation (0.63, 95 % CI 0.49-0.75). The ΔCDPV was a statistically significant superior predictor when compared with the other parameters. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were also the highest for ΔCDPV, with an optimal cutoff at 14 %. There was good correlation between ΔCDPV and SVI increment after the fluid challenge (r = 0.84; p < 0.001).
Conclusions: ΔCDPV can be more accurate than other methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock receiving lung protective mechanical ventilation. ΔCDPV also has a high correlation with SVI increase after fluid challenge.