Project Details
Abstract
In septic critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with acute circulatory failure,
inadequate volume resuscitation leads to multiple organ failure. Early goal-directed therapy
emphasizes early and aggressive hemodynamic support in patients with severe sepsis and
septic shock. On the other hand, because of increased microvascular permeability and
capillary leakage, conservative fluid management and more aggressive restriction in fluid
accumulation to reduce lung water and tissue edema has been suggested by ARDSnet. Fluid
responsiveness refers to the ability of the heart to increase its stroke volume in response to
volume load. Accurately predicting volume responsiveness will be beneficial in obviating the
need for unnecessary fluid loading, and in detecting patients who may benefit from a volume
load.
By inducing cyclic changes in pleural and transpulmonary pressure, mechanical
ventilation results in cyclic changes in the preload and afterload, and therefore, the cyclic
variation in systolic and pulse pressure. Recently, a systemic review concluded that dynamic
preload indicator [pulse pressure variation (PPV), stroke volume variation (SVV)] are highly
accurate in predicting volume responsiveness in critically ill patients. However, this
technique is limited to patients who receive controlled ventilation with adequate tidal volume
(> 8 ml/Kg) and sedation or paralysis is needed to abolish the spontaneous ventilation.
For ARDS patients, protective ventilatory strategy suggested low tidal volume to 6 ml/Kg.
On the contrary, high PEEP needed for ARDS to prevent VALI induces a leftward shift to the
steep pat of the Frank-Starling curve and increase the fluid responsiveness. Whether the
dynamic preload indicators (PPV and SVV) are still effective in ARDS patients for predicting
fluid responsiveness remain controversial.
Passive leg raising (PLR), by inducing a gravitational transfer of blood from the lower part
of the body toward the central circulatory compartment, can be considered as a brief “self
volume challenge”. Recently, a systemic review and meta-analysis concluded that PLR-induced
changes in cardiac output reliably predict fluid responsiveness regardless of ventilation mode,
underlying cardiac rhythm and technique of measurement and can be recommended for routine
assessment of fluid responsiveness in the majority of ICU population. More importantly, this
prediction remains very valuable in patients with cardiac arrhythmias or spontaneous breathing
activity.
Respiratory variations in the pulse oximeter plethysmographic waveform amplitude
(ΔPOP) have been shownto be able to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically
ventilated patients. The main advantage of this index is that it is noninvasive, widely
available, and inexpensive. Perfusion index (PI), the percentage between the infrared pulsatile
and nonpulsatile signal, reflects the amplitude of the pulse oximeter waveform. Recently,
Pleth Variability Index (PVI), derived from perfusion index, affords a continuous monitoring
of ΔPOP.PVI has been shown to be correlated to ΔPOP and PPV and has been demonstrated
to be equivalent to SVV as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in ventilated patients during
major surgery. However, whether the PVI can predict the fluid responsiveness in ARDS
necessitating low tidal volume and high PEEP is not clear.
Because of the aforementioned contrasting effects of low tidal volume and high PEEP on
the prediction of fluid responsiveness, the aim of this study is to compare the relative predicting
power of the dynamic preload indicator (PPV, SVV), passive leg raising test, and PVI on the
fluid responsiveness of ARDS ventilated with various PEEP levels or various tidal volumes.
Project IDs
Project ID:PC10202-0370
External Project ID:NSC101-2314-B182-073-MY2
External Project ID:NSC101-2314-B182-073-MY2
Status | Finished |
---|---|
Effective start/end date | 01/08/13 → 31/07/14 |
Fingerprint
Explore the research topics touched on by this project. These labels are generated based on the underlying awards/grants. Together they form a unique fingerprint.