Search

Purpose: The objective of our study was to assess the reliability of the distensibility index of the inferior vena cava (dIVC) as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in postoperative, mechanically ventilated patients and compare its accuracy with that of the pulse pressure variation (PPV) measurement., Materials and Methods: We included postoperative mechanically ventilated and sedated patients who underwent volume expansion with 500mL of crystalloids over 15minutes. A response to fluid infusion was defined as a 15% increase in the left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral according to transthoracic echocardiography. The inferior vena cava diameters were recorded by a subcostal view using the M-mode and the PPV by automatic calculation. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated for the baseline dIVC and PPV., Results: Twenty patients were included. The area under the ROC curve for dIVC was 0.84 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.0), and the best cutoff value was 16% (sensitivity, 67%; specificity, 100%). The area under the ROC curve for PPV was 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.0), and the best cutoff was 12.4% (sensitivity, 89%; specificity, 100%). A noninferiority test showed that dIVC cannot replace PPV to predict fluid responsiveness (P=.28)., Conclusion: The individual PPV discriminative properties for predicting fluid responsiveness in postoperative patients seemed superior to those of dIVC., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The applicability of pulse pressure variation (ΔPP) to predict fluid responsiveness using lung-protective ventilation strategies is uncertain in clinical practice. We designed this study to evaluate the accuracy of this parameter in predicting the fluid responsiveness of septic patients ventilated with low tidal volumes (TV) (6 ml kg(-1))., Methods: Forty patients after the resuscitation phase of severe sepsis and septic shock who were mechanically ventilated with 6 ml kg(-1) were included. The ΔPP was obtained automatically at baseline and after a standardized fluid challenge (7 ml kg(-1)). Patients whose cardiac output increased by more than 15% were considered fluid responders. The predictive values of ΔPP and static variables [right atrial pressure (RAP) and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP)] were evaluated through a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis., Results: Thirty-four patients had characteristics consistent with acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome and were ventilated with high levels of PEEP [median (inter-quartile range) 10.0 (10.0-13.5)]. Nineteen patients were considered fluid responders. The RAP and PAOP significantly increased, and ΔPP significantly decreased after volume expansion. The ΔPP performance [ROC curve area: 0.91 (0.82-1.0)] was better than that of the RAP [ROC curve area: 0.73 (0.59-0.90)] and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure [ROC curve area: 0.58 (0.40-0.76)]. The ROC curve analysis revealed that the best cut-off for ΔPP was 6.5%, with a sensitivity of 0.89, specificity of 0.90, positive predictive value of 0.89, and negative predictive value of 0.90., Conclusions: Automatized ΔPP accurately predicted fluid responsiveness in septic patients ventilated with low TV.