Emergency Department (ED) Critical Care   Emergency medicine critical care podcast

 

Predicting Fluid Responsiveness

Great review from Chest

 

The Fluid Challenge

Fluid Challenge Revisited (CCM 2006;34:1333)

2-5 rule

Check in at 10 minutes, if CVP increase <2, continue

2-5 Stop infusion, and wait 10 minutes. If it drops back to less than 2, continue

>5 Stop fluid challenge

 

CVP

kinda sucks

Many articles

this one is nice (

Crit Care Med 2007 Vol. 35, No. 1:64

Passive Leg Raise

Passive leg-raising
PLR to 30° transiently increases venous return [64] in patients who are preload responsive. As PLR only transiently increases CO and blood pressure [65] in responders, it is only a diagnostic test and cannot be considered as a treatment for hypovolemia. The main advantage of the PLR approach is that it is reversible and easy to perform in patients breathing spontaneously and with arrhythmias [66••]. It also can be repeated many times to reassess preload responsiveness without any risk of inducing pulmonary edema or cor pulmonale in potential nonresponders. One of the major limitations of this technique is that in severely hypovolemic patients, the blood volume mobilized by leg-raising which is dependent on total blood volume could be small, which, in turn, can show minimal to no increase in CO and blood pressure, even in responders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The passive leg-raising test

Lifting the legs passively from the horizontal position induces a gravitational transfer of blood from the lower limbs toward the intrathoracic compartment (Fig. 2). Several studies conducted in various hemodynamic conditions have demonstrated an increase in the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure [38], in the left ventricular end-diastolic dimension [9], or in the left ventricular ejection time [18••] during passive leg raising (PLR), supporting the evidence that the volume of blood transferred to the heart during PLR is sufficient to increase the left cardiac preload and thus to challenge the Frank-Starling curve. Beyond its ease of use, the method has the advantage of inducing reversible effects once the legs are tilted down [18••,38]. Therefore, PLR may act as a ‘reversible self-volume challenge’.

 

The concept of fluid response prediction by using PLR has emerged from the study by Boulain and coworkers [38], in which the increase in thermodilution stroke volume following a fluid infusion correlated with the increase in arterial pulse pressure produced by PLR. Recently, we demonstrated the full ability of PLR to serve as a test for preload responsiveness [18••]. In 71 patients with acute circulatory failure, changes in aortic blood flow (measured by esophageal Doppler) during a 45° leg elevation enabled us to predict the changes in aortic blood flow produced by a 500 ml fluid challenge. This was the case even in the subgroup of patients with cardiac arrhythmias or spontaneous ventilator triggering, situations in which respiratory variation of arterial pulse pressure lost any predictive ability. Probably descending aortic blood flow was a better measure of cardiac output than pulse pressure, volume responsiveness was better predicted by PLR-induced changes in aortic blood flow than by PLR-induced changes in arterial pulse pressure. In another series of patients fully adapted to their ventilator, Lafanechere et al. [17•] also found that fluid responsiveness could be reliably predicted by the response of descending aortic blood flow to PLR.

Since the maximal hemodynamic effects of PLR occurred within the first minute of leg elevation [18••], it is important to assess these effects with a method able to track changes in cardiac output or stroke volume on a real-time basis. In this regard, the response of descending aortic blood flow (measured by esophageal Doppler) to PLR [17•,18••] as well as the response of the velocity–time integral (measured by transthoracic echocardiography) [39] to PLR have been demonstrated to be helpful in predicting the response to volume administration in patients with spontaneous

 

17• Lafanechere A, Pene F, Goulenok C, et al. Changes in aortic blood flow induced by passive leg raising predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients. Crit Care 2006; 10:R132. Mount Sinai Serials This study confirms the reliability of the PLR test for predicting volume responsiveness by means of esophageal Doppler monitoring, as demonstrated by Monnet et al. [18••]. [Context Link]

18•• Monnet X, Rienzo M, Osman D, et al. Passive leg raising predicts fluid responsiveness in the critically ill. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:1402–1407. Ovid Full Text Mount Sinai Serials In 71 patients with acute circulatory failure, increases in the aortic blood flow measured by esophageal Doppler by more than 10% allows one to predict volume responsiveness with a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 94%. Importantly, in a subgroup of patients with spontaneous breathing activity or cardiac arrhythmias, PLR kept its full predictive value while the respiratory variation of pulse pressure was ineffective for predicting volume responsiveness. [Context Link]

 

38 Boulain T, Achard JM, Teboul JL, et al. Changes in BP induced by passive leg raising predict response to fluid loading in critically ill patients. Chest 2002; 121:1245–1252. Mount Sinai Serials Bibliographic Links [Context Link]

 

 

Passive leg raising-induced changes in mean radial artery pressure can be used to assess preload dependence

Critical Care 2007, 11(Suppl 2):P307

 

(Chest. 2002;121:1245-1252.)
Changes in BP Induced by Passive Leg Raising Predict Response to Fluid Loading in Critically Ill Patients*

Thierry Boulain, MD; Jean-Michel Achard, MD; Jean-Louis Teboul, MD; Christian Richard, MD; Dominique Perrotin, MD and Guy Ginies, MD

Author(s):

Monnet, Xavier MD, PhD; Rienzo, Mario MD; Osman, David MD; Anguel, Nadia MD; Richard, Christian MD; Pinsky, Michael R. MD, Dr hc; Teboul, Jean-Louis MD, PhD

Issue:
Volume 34(5), May 2006, pp 1402-1407

Passive leg raising predicts fluid responsiveness in the critically ill *

critical care medicine

 

>9% change in pulse pressure or > 10% in SV, by PLR predicted volume responsiveness in non-intubated spont breathing patients. (CCM 2010,38:819)

 

To know if your passive leg raise is accurate, you need to see the CVP increase by at least 2 mm Hg. If this occurs pulse pressure changes are accurate (8%)

(Inten Care Med 2010;36:940)

If there is not an icrease, then you need a stroke volume marker and can't use PP

LR +9, LR-0.14

 

 

Delta Down and Such

predicting fluid responsiveness in the OR (Br J Anaes 2007;98(4):545)
delta down component of SPV
minimal resp spv=not fluid responsive

 

Editorial on pulse pressure variation

 

Original PPV Study

Dynamic Measures using A-line

(Chest 2002;121:2000)

 

Article on Non-Invasive (Br J Anaesth 2006;97:808)

 

(Can J Anesth 2003;50:10)

 

American Journal of Critical Care. 2005;14: 364-368

Use of the Trendelenburg Position as the Resuscitation Position: To T or Not to T?

 

 

Expiratory Hold to Predict Volume Responsiveness (Crit Care Med 2009;37(3):951)

15 second expiratory hold

maximal change during last five seconds = test

15% change in arterial pulse pressure predicts volume expansion

 

 

Dynamic changes can be false if there is RV dysfunction (will yield false positives) as the PPV means the LA needs more fluid but giving it in the face of the RV failure will not get the fluid to the LA. Put the patient on 10 ml/kg and sedate them. (CCM 2009;37(9):2642)

 

Art Pressure Wave Interpretation

Critical Care 2005;9

The mean systemic pressure is the theoretical pressure value that would be observed in the overall circulatory system under zero flow conditions, assumed to be pressure in the right atrium

MAP=(HR x SV x SVR) -mRAP

13% variation discerned between responders and non to add. fluid resus

 

Pre-ejection period variations predict the fluid responsiveness of septic ventilated patients
[Clinical Investigations]
Feissel, Marc MD; Badie, Julio MD; Merlani, Paolo G. MD; Faller, Jean-Pierre MD; Bendjelid, Karim MD, MS


Conclusions: The present study found [DELTA]PEPKT and [DELTA]PEPPLET to be as accurate as [DELTA]PP in the prediction of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated septic patients.

 

Crit Care Med 2005;33(11):2534

 

Study comparing static pressure markers to Pulse Pressure variation and new proprietary Resp Systolic Variation Test (Br J Anaes 2005;95(6):746)

 

 

Driving pressure > 20 is probably necessary to get good PPV (Inten Care Med Volume 36, Number 3 / March, 2010:1432)

Brachial Artery Peak Velocity

 

 

use of doppler ultrasound variation of brachial artery in response to ventilation

 

 

Illustrative example of Doppler evaluation of brachial artery peak velocity variation in a responder patient and nonresponder patient. In the responder patient (left), volume expansion (VE) induced a decrease of brachial artery peak velocity variation (ΔVpeakbrach) by 15% (from 23% at baseline to 8% after VE) and an increase of stroke volume index and cardiac index by 27% and 12%, respectively. Radial pulse pressure variation (ΔPPrad) and stroke volume variation (ΔSVVigileo) also significantly decreased in the same patient (from 23% to 4%, and from 24% to 11%, respectively). In nonresponder patients (right), VE did not induce any significant change in ΔVpeakbrach (from 9% to 9% after VE), ΔPPrad (from 10% to 8%) or ΔSVVigileo (from 13% to 12%). Neither cardiac index nor stroke volume index increased significantly after VE (6% and 8%, respectively). SVi = stroke volume index.

Monge García et al. Critical Care 2009 13:R142

 

 

 

Three diastolic filling patterns as assessed by Doppler echocardiography. A = late transmitral velocity occurring with atrial contraction; AF = atrial fibrillation; DTE = deceleration time of early transmitral velocity; E = early transmitral velocity; EA = ratio of early to late transmitral velocity.

 

 

IVC Ultrasound

 

 

 Home   |   Disclaimer   |   Contact   |   Podcast