Stroke volume changes induced by a recruitment maneuver predict fluid responsiveness in patients with protective ventilation in the operating theater

Bruno De Broca, Jeremie Garnier, Marc-Olivier Fischer, Thomas Archange, Julien Marc, Osama Abou-Arab, Hervé Dupont, Emmanuel Lorne, Pierre-Grégoire Guinot, Bruno De Broca, Jeremie Garnier, Marc-Olivier Fischer, Thomas Archange, Julien Marc, Osama Abou-Arab, Hervé Dupont, Emmanuel Lorne, Pierre-Grégoire Guinot

Abstract

During abdominal surgery, the use of protective ventilation with a low tidal volume, positive expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RMs) may limit the applicability of dynamic preload indices. The objective of the present study was to establish whether or not the variation in stroke volume (SV) during an RM could predict fluid responsiveness.We prospectively included patients receiving protective ventilation (tidal volume: 6 mL kg, PEEP: 5-7 cmH2O; RMs). Hemodynamic variables, such as heart rate, arterial pressure, SV, cardiac output (CO), respiratory variation in SV (ΔrespSV) and pulse pressure (ΔrespPP), and the variation in SV (ΔrecSV) as well as pulse pressure (ΔrecPP) during an RM were measured at baseline, at the end of the RM, and after fluid expansion. Responders were defined as patients with an SV increase of at least 15% after infusion of 500 mL of crystalloid solution.Thirty-seven (62%) of the 60 included patients were responders. Responders and nonresponders differed significantly in terms of the median ΔrecSV (26% [19-37] vs 10% [4-12], respectively; P < 0.0001). A ΔrecSV value more than 16% predicted fluid responsiveness with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AU) of 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.99; P < 0.0001) and a narrow gray zone between 15% and 17%. The area under the curve values for ΔrecPP and ΔrespSV were, respectively, 0.81 (95%CI: 0.7-0.91; P = 0.0001) and 0.80 (95%CI: 0.70-0.94; P < 0.0001). ΔrespPP did not predict fluid responsiveness.During abdominal surgery with protective ventilation, a ΔrecSV value more than 16% accurately predicted fluid responsiveness and had a narrow gray zone (between 15% and 17%). ΔrecPP and ΔrespSV (but not ΔrespPP) were also predictive.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Receiver operating characteristic curves for the SV variation during an recruitment maneuvers (ΔrecSV: 0.95 [95%CI: 0.91 to 0.99], P < 0.0001) (A), the pulse pressure variation during an recruitment maneuvers (ΔrecPP: 0.81 [95%CI: 0.7–0.91], P < 0.0001) (B), the respiratory variation in stroke volume (ΔrespSV: 0.80 [95%CI: 0.7–0.94], P = 0.01) (C), and the respiratory variation in pulse pressure (ΔrespPP: 0.65 [95%CI:0.51–0.77], P = 0.07) (D), with a view to discriminating between fluid expansion responders and nonresponders.

References

    1. Hamilton MA, Cecconi M, Rhodes A. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the use of preemptive hemodynamic intervention to improve postoperative outcomes in moderate and high-risk surgical patients. Anesth Analg 2011; 112:1392–1402.
    1. Feldheiser A, Aziz O, Baldini G, et al. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. (ERAS) for gastrointestinal surgery, part 2: consensus statement for anaesthesia practice. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2016; 60:289–334.
    1. Perel A, Pizov R, Cotev S. Respiratory variations in the arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation reflect volume status and fluid responsiveness. Intensive Care Med 2014; 40:798–807.
    1. Guerin L, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Monitoring volume and fluid responsiveness: from static to dynamic indicators. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2013; 27:177–185.
    1. Futier E, Godet T, Millot A, et al. Mechanical ventilation in abdominal surgery. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2014; 33:472–475.
    1. Severgnini P, Selmo G, Lanza C, et al. Protective mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia for open abdominal surgery improves postoperative pulmonary function. Anesthesiology 2013; 118:1307–1321.
    1. Futier E, Constantin J-M, Paugam-Burtz C, et al. A trial of intraoperative low-tidal-volume ventilation in abdominal surgery. N Engl J Med 2013; 369:428–437.
    1. De Backer D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, et al. Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume. Intensive Care Med 2005; 31:517–523.
    1. Guinot PG, Godart J, de Broca B, et al. End-expiratory occlusion manoeuvre does not accurately predict fluid responsiveness in the operating theatre. Br J Anaesth 2014; 112:1050–1054.
    1. Grasso S, Mascia L, Del Turco M, et al. Effects of recruiting maneuvers in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome ventilated with protective ventilatory strategy. Anesthesiology 2002; 96:795–802.
    1. Wilkman E, Kuitunen A, Pettilä V, et al. Fluid responsiveness predicted by elevation of PEEP in patients with septic shock. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2014; 58:27–35.
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. Vandenbroucke JP; Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007; 335:806–808.
    1. Guinot P-G, Broca B de, Arab OA, et al. Ability of stroke volume variation measured by oesophageal Doppler monitoring to predict fluid responsiveness during surgery. Br J Anaesth 2013; 110:28–33.
    1. Mahjoub Y, Lorne E, Micaux Y, et al. Accuracy of automated continuous calculation of pulse pressure variation in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med 2010; 37:360–361.
    1. Guinot PG, Urbina B, de Broca B, et al. Predictability of the respiratory variation of stroke volume varies according to the definition of fluid responsiveness. Br J Anaesth 2014; 112:580–581.
    1. DeLong ER, DeLong MD, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1998; 44:837–845.
    1. Cannesson M, Le Manach Y, Hofer CK, et al. Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of pulse pressure variations for the Prediction of Fluid Responsiveness: a “gray zone” approach. Anesthesiology 2011; 115:231–241.
    1. Nielsen J, Ostergaard M, Kjaergaard J, et al. Lung recruitment maneuver depresses central hemodynamics in patients following cardiac surgery. Intensive Care Med 2005; 31:1189–1194.
    1. Vieillard-Baron A, Loubieres Y, Schmitt JM, et al. Cyclic changes in right ventricular output impedance during mechanical ventilation. J Appl Physiol 1999; 87:1644–1650.
    1. Jardin F, Farcot JC, Boisante L, et al. Influence of positive end-expiratory pressure on left ventricular performance. N Engl J Med 1981; 304:387–392.
    1. Fougeres E, Teboul JL, Richard C, et al. Hemodynamic impact of a positive end-expiratory pressure setting in acute respiratory distress syndrome: importance of the volume status. Crit Care Med 2010; 38:802–807.
    1. Celebi S, Köner O, Menda F, et al. The pulmonary and hemodynamic effects of two different recruitment maneuvers after cardiac surgery. Anesth Analg 2007; 104:384–390.
    1. Freitas FGR, Bafi AT, Nascente APM, et al. Predictive value of pulse pressure variation for fluid responsiveness in septic patients using lung-protective ventilation strategies. Br J Anaesth 2013; 110:402–408.
    1. Huang CC, Fu JY, Hu HC, et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients ventilated with low tidal volume and high positive end-expiratory pressure. Crit Care Med 2008; 36:2810–2816.
    1. Feldheiser A, Hunsicker O, Krebbel H, et al. Oesophageal Doppler and calibrated pulse contour analysis are not interchangeable within a goal-directed haemodynamic algorithm in major gynaecological surgery. Br J Anaesth 2014; 113:822–831.
    1. Lansdorp B, Hofhuizen C, van Lavieren M, et al. Mechanical ventilation-induced intrathoracic pressure distribution and heart-lung interactions∗. Crit Care Med 2014; 42:1983–1990.
    1. Singer M, Allen MJ, Webb AR, et al. Effects of alterations in left ventricular filling, contractility, and systemic vascular resistance on the ascending aortic blood velocity waveform of normal subjects. Crit Care Med 1991; 19:1138–1145.
    1. Guinot PG, de Broca B, Bernard E, et al. Respiratory stroke volume variation assessed by oesophageal Doppler monitoring predicts fluid responsiveness during laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth 2014; 112:660–664.
    1. Güldner A, Kiss T, Serpa Neto A, et al. Intraoperative protective mechanical ventilation for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications: a comprehensive review of the role of tidal volume, positive end-expiratory pressure, and lung recruitment maneuvers. Anesthesiology 2015; 123:692–713.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera