RESUMO
Objective To explore the accuracy of fluid responsiveness assessment by variability of peripheral arterial peak velocity and variability of inferior vena cava diameter (ΔIVC) in patients with septic shock. Methods A prospective study was conducted. The patients with septic shock undergoing mechanical ventilation (MV) admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) of Beijing Electric Power Hospital from January 2016 to December 2017 were enrolled. According to sepsis bundles of septic shock, volume expansion (VE) was conducted. The increase in cardiac index (ΔCI) after VE ≥ 10% was defined as liquid reaction positive (responsive group), ΔCI < 10% was defined as the liquid reaction negative (non-responsive group). The hemodynamic parameters [central venous pressure (CVP), intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI), stroke volume variation (SVV), ΔIVC, variability of carotid Doppler peak velocity (ΔCDPV), and variability of brachial artery peak velocity (ΔVpeak-BA)] before and after VE were monitored. The correlations between the hemodynamic parameters and ΔCI were explored by Pearson correlation analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted to analyze the predictive value of all hemodynamic parameters on fluid responsiveness. Results During the study, 74 patients with septic shock were included, of whom 9 were excluded because of peripheral artery stenosis, recurrent arrhythmia or abdominal distension influencing the ultrasound examination, and 65 patients were finally enrolled in the analysis. There were 31 patients in the responsive group and 34 in the non-responsive group. SVV, ΔIVC, ΔCDPV and ΔVpeak-BA before VE in responsive group were significantly higher than those of the non-responsive group [SVV: (12.3±2.4)% vs. (9.2±2.1)%, ΔIVC: (22.3±5.3)% vs. (15.5±3.7)%, ΔCDPV: (15.3±3.3)% vs. (10.3±2.4)%, ΔVpeak-BA: (14.5±3.3)% vs. (9.6±2.3)%, all P < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in CVP [mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 7.5±2.5 vs. 8.2±2.6] or ITBVI (mL/m2: 875.2±173.2 vs. 853.2±192.0) between the responsive group and non-responsive group (both P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in hemodynamic parameter after VE between the two groups. Correlation analysis showed that SVV, ΔIVC, ΔCDPV, and ΔVpeak-BA before VE showed significant linearity correlation with ΔCI (r value was 0.832, 0.813, 0.854, and 0.814, respectively, all P < 0.05), but no correlation was found between CVP and ΔCI (r = -0.342, P > 0.05) as well as ITBVI and ΔCI (r = -0.338, P > 0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the area under ROC curve (AUC) of SVV, ΔIVC, ΔCDPV, and ΔVpeak-BA before VE for predicting fluid responsiveness was 0.857, 0.826, 0.906, and 0.866, respectively, which was significantly higher than that of CVP (AUC = 0.611) and ITBVI (AUC = 0.679). When the optimal cut-off value of SVV for predicting fluid responsiveness was 11.5%, the sensitivity was 70.4%, and the specificity was 94.7%. When the optimal cut-off value of ΔIVC was 20.5%, the sensitivity was 60.3%, and the specificity was 89.7%. When the optimal cut-off value of ΔCDPV was 13.0%, the sensitivity was 75.2%, and the specificity was 94.9%. When the optimal cut-off value of ΔVpeak-BA was 12.7%, the sensitivity was 64.8%, and the specificity was 89.7%. Conclusions Ultrasound assessment of ΔIVC, ΔCDPV, and ΔVpeak-BA could predict fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock receiving mechanical ventilation. ΔCDPV had the highest predictive value among these parameters.
RESUMO
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of predicting the incidence of supine hy-potension syndrome (SHS)after spinal anesthesia measured by ultrasonic measurement of the varia-tion of brachial artery peak velocity in different positions of parturient.Methods Parturient scheduled for elective cesarean section,ASA physical status Ⅰ or Ⅱ,were divided into SHS group and no-SHS group (SBP in the upper extremity decreased by > 30 mm Hg or decreased to < 80 mm Hg)after spinal anesthesia.HR,SBP,DBP of supine position and left lateral position before anesthesia were re-corded,and brachial artery peak velocity were measured by Ultrasonic.The differences of the above indexs before and after the transformation position were calculated.The receiver operating characteris-tic curve (ROC)was plotted by indexs of which P values were less than 0.05,to evaluate the predic-tive effect of each index on SHS after spinal anesthesia.Results Among the 196 patients,89 cases (45.4%)developed SHS after spinal anesthesia.SBP,DBP,peak velocity of brachial artery (Vpmin) and brachial artery peak velocity variation (ΔVp)were different before and after the transformation position (P<0.05).The difference in SHS group was significantly higher than no-SHS group.The areas under ROC curve (AUC)of ΔSBP,ΔDBP,ΔVpmin,ΔΔVp were 0.711 (95%CI 0.575-0.846), 0.573 (95%CI 0.419-0.727),0.948 (95% CI 0.895-0.987),0.864 (95% CI 0.770-0.958),and the cut-off values were 17.5 mm Hg,7.6 mm Hg,17.8 cm/s,and 13.1%.Conclusion The differ-ence of brachial artery peak velocity measured by ultrasonic in different positions of parturient can ef-fectively predict the occurrence of SHS,in which ΔVpmin≥ 17.8 cm/s has better predictive effect.
RESUMO
Objective To investigate the accuracy and feasibility of brachial artery peak velocity variation (ΔVpeakbrach) and inferior vena cava variability (VIVC) as indicators of fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients. Methods A single-center prospective observation was conducted. The patients on mechanical ventilation with spontaneously breathing admitted to Department of Critical Care Medicine of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from June 2013 to August 2015 were enrolled. The patients were diagnosed as severe sepsis or sepsis shock. The peak velocity in brachial artery and diameter of the inferior vena cava at the end of inspiration and expiration was measured by bedside portable ultrasonic machine, and then ΔVpeakbrach and VIVC were calculated. The hemodynamic parameters were collected at baseline and after volume expansion (VE). The stroke volume (SV) was measured by pulse-indicated continuous cardiac output (PiCCO). Patients were classified as responders or non-responders according to the variation of SV (ΔSV) increased ≥ 15% or not after VE. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was plotted to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of ΔVpeakbrach and VIVC in predicting volume responsiveness. Results Among 58 patients after VE, 32 patients were defined as responders and the rest 26 were defined as non-responders.There were no differences in gender, age, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ) score, dose of vasoactive agent, ventilator parameters and infection site. Compared with baseline hemodynamic parameters, heart rate (HR) was decreased (bpm: 95±18 vs. 103±21), and systolic blood pressure (SBP) was increased [mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 92±8 vs. 80±7] after VE in responders; central venous pressure (CVP) was increased after VE in non-responders (mmHg: 11±4 vs. 8±3, all P < 0.05). The ΔVpeakbrach [(15.4±4.3)% vs. (11.2±3.5)%] and VIVC [(18.6±4.1)% vs. (14.3±3.6)%] in responders were significantly increased as compared with those of non-responders (both P < 0.05). The area under ROC curve (AUC) of ΔVpeakbrach for predicting volume responsiveness was 0.816. When the cut-off value of ΔVpeakbrach was ≥ 13.3%, the sensitivity was 71.9%, and the specificity was 80.8%. AUC of VIVC for predicting volume responsiveness was 0.733. When the cut-off value of VIVC was ≥ 19.25%, the sensitivity was 53.1%, and the specificity was 88.5%. Conclusion ΔVpeakbrach and VIVC are reliable indicators for predicting volume responsiveness in critical patients.