Pulse Pressure Variations and Plethysmographic Variability Index Measured at Ear Are Able to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in the Sitting Position for Neurosurgery.
Journal
Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology
ISSN: 1537-1921
Titre abrégé: J Neurosurg Anesthesiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8910749
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2020
Jul 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
23
2
2019
medline:
21
7
2021
entrez:
22
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pulse pressure variation (PPV) and plethysmographic variability index (PVI), dynamic indicators of preload dependence based on heart-lung interactions, are used to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients in the supine position. The sitting position for neurosurgery, by changing intrathoracic blood volume, could affect the capacity of PPV and PVI to predict fluid responsiveness. The aim of the study was to assess the ability of PPV and PVI to predict fluid responsiveness during general anesthesia in the sitting position. In total, 31 patients were included after settling in the sitting position but before surgery began. PPV, PVI with a finger sensor (PVI finger), and PVI with an ear sensor (PVI ear) were recorded before and after a fluid challenge of hydroxylethylstarch 250 mL over 10 minute. Esophageal Doppler was used to record stroke volume. Patients were defined as fluid responders if stroke volume increased by more than 10% after the fluid challenge. In total, 13 (42%) patients were fluid responders. PPV and PVI ear were higher in responders than in nonresponders before the fluid challenge (12±5 vs. 7±3; P=0.0005 and 14±5 vs. 8±3; P=0.001, respectively). Areas under the receiver-operating curves to predict fluid responsiveness were 0.87 for PPV (P<0.0001), 0.87 for PVI ear (P<0.0001), and 0.64 for PVI finger (P=0.17). PPV ≥8% or PVI ear ≥11% predicted fluid responsiveness with sensitivities of 83% for both, and specificities of 83% and 91%, respectively. However PVI ear data were not available in 26% of patients. PPV can be used to predict fluid responsiveness in the sitting position for neurosurgery.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pulse pressure variation (PPV) and plethysmographic variability index (PVI), dynamic indicators of preload dependence based on heart-lung interactions, are used to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients in the supine position. The sitting position for neurosurgery, by changing intrathoracic blood volume, could affect the capacity of PPV and PVI to predict fluid responsiveness. The aim of the study was to assess the ability of PPV and PVI to predict fluid responsiveness during general anesthesia in the sitting position.
METHODS
METHODS
In total, 31 patients were included after settling in the sitting position but before surgery began. PPV, PVI with a finger sensor (PVI finger), and PVI with an ear sensor (PVI ear) were recorded before and after a fluid challenge of hydroxylethylstarch 250 mL over 10 minute. Esophageal Doppler was used to record stroke volume. Patients were defined as fluid responders if stroke volume increased by more than 10% after the fluid challenge.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 13 (42%) patients were fluid responders. PPV and PVI ear were higher in responders than in nonresponders before the fluid challenge (12±5 vs. 7±3; P=0.0005 and 14±5 vs. 8±3; P=0.001, respectively). Areas under the receiver-operating curves to predict fluid responsiveness were 0.87 for PPV (P<0.0001), 0.87 for PVI ear (P<0.0001), and 0.64 for PVI finger (P=0.17). PPV ≥8% or PVI ear ≥11% predicted fluid responsiveness with sensitivities of 83% for both, and specificities of 83% and 91%, respectively. However PVI ear data were not available in 26% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
PPV can be used to predict fluid responsiveness in the sitting position for neurosurgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30789383
doi: 10.1097/ANA.0000000000000587
pii: 00008506-202007000-00012
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
263-267Références
Porter JM, Pidgeon C, Cunningham AJ. The sitting position in neurosurgery: a critical appraisal. Br J Anaesth. 1999;82:117–128.
Pin-on P, Schroeder D, Munis J. The hemodynamic management of 5177 neurosurgical and orthopedic patients who underwent surgery in the sitting or “beach chair” position without incidence of adverse neurologic events. Anesth Analg. 2013;116:1317–1324.
Benes J, Giglio M, Brienza N, et al. The effects of goal-directed fluid therapy based on dynamic parameters on post-surgical outcome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care. 2014;18:584.
Cecconi M, Corredor C, Arulkumaran N, et al. Clinical review: Goal-directed therapy-what is the evidence in surgical patients? The effect on different risk groups. Crit Care. 2013;17:209.
Monnet X, Marick PE, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update. Ann Intensive Care. 2016;6:111.
Biais M, Bernard O, Ha JC, et al. Abilities of pulse pressure variations and stroke volume variations to predict fluid responsiveness in prone position during scoliosis surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104:407–413.
Berger K, Francony G, Bouzat P, et al. Prone position affects stroke volume variation performance in predicting fluid responsiveness in neurosurgical patients. Minerva Anestesiol. 2015;81:628–635.
Cohen J, Korevaar D, Altman D, et al. STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e012799.
Ray P, Le Manach Y, Riou B, et al. Statistical evaluation of a biomarker. Anesthesiology. 2010;112:1023–1040.
Mesquida J, Kim HK, Pinsky MR. Effect of tidal volume, intrathoracic pressure, and cardiac contractility on variations in pulse pressure, stroke volume, and intrathoracic blood volume. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37:1672–1679.
Fischer MO, Guinot PG, Biais M, et al. A dynamic view of dynamic indices. Minerva Anestesiol. 2016;82:1115–1121.
Yang SY, Shim JK, Song Y, et al. Validation of pulse pressure variation and corrected flow time as predictors of fluid responsiveness in patients in the prone position. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110:713–720.
Lee SH, Chun YM, Oh YJ, et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in the beach chair position using dynamic preload indices. J Clin Monit Comput. 2016;30:995–1002.
Buhre W, Weyland A, Buhre K, et al. Effects of the sitting position on the distribution of blood volume in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84:354–357.
Chu H, Wang Y, Sun Y, et al. Accuracy of pleth variability index to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Monit Comput. 2016;30:265–274.
Desgranges FP, Desebbe O, Ghazouani A, et al. Influence of the site of measurement on the ability of plethysmographic variability index to predict fluid responsiveness. Br J Anaesth. 2011;107:329–335.
Fischer MO, Pellissier A, Saplacan V, et al. Cephalic versus digital plethysmographic variability index measurement: a comparative pilot study in cardiac surgery patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2014;28:1510–1515.
Mirski MA, Lele AV, Fitzsimmons L, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of vascular air embolism. Anesthesiology. 2007;106:164–177.
Lindroos AC, Niiya T, Silvasti-Lundell M, et al. Stroke volume-directed administration of hydroxyethyl starch or Ringer’s acetate in sitting position during craniotomy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2013;57:729–736.
Xia J, He Z, Cao X, et al. The brain relaxation and cerebral metabolism in stroke volume variation-directed fluid therapy during supratentorial tumors resection: crystalloid solution versus colloid solution. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2014;26:320–327.
Luo J, Xue J, Liu J, et al. Goal-directed fluid restriction during brain surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Intensive Care. 2017;7:16.
Wu CY, Lin YS, Tseng HM, et al. Comparison of two stroke volume variation-based goal-directed fluid therapies for supratentorial brain tumour resection: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth. 2017;119:934–942.
Vallet B, Blanloeil Y, Cholley B, et al. Guidelines for perioperative haemodynamic optimization. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2013;32:151–158.