iSepsis Project (EMCrit)

Online Medical Education on Emergency Department (ED) Critical Care, Trauma, and Resuscitation

You are here: Home / iSepsis / iSepsis – Fluid Management and Hemodynamic Assessement

iSepsis – Fluid Management and Hemodynamic Assessement

by 18 Comments

This lecture reviews the fundamental concepts regarding fluid administration and hemodynamic monitoring in the critically ill

The viewer may also be interested in the lecture on the utility of the CVP

Paul Marik

Paul Marik

Intensivist, Researcher, Myth-Buster, Status Quo Destabilizer
Paul Marik

Latest posts by Paul Marik (see all)

.

Subscribe Now

If you enjoyed this post, you will almost certainly enjoy our others. Subscribe to our email list to keep informed on all of the ED and Pulmonary Critical Care goodness.

This Post was by , published 3 months ago. We never spam; we hate spammers! Spammers probably work for the Joint Commission.

Comment Here

18 Comments on "iSepsis – Fluid Management and Hemodynamic Assessement"

avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic
Guest
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic
Doctors…A little help please for a simple critical care paramedic. I watched Dr. Marik’s presentation and found it very interesting. I certainly do not profess to know everything he talked about, but I got the gist of it. OK, so the intricacies are not really my concern. Those belong to the intensivists. I hope they are abreast of Dr. Marik’s concerns about the Surviving Sepsis Campaign and EGDT. I only have the patient under two circumstances. If it is a 911 paramedic call I likely have the patient for 30-40 minutes or so if I decide to take said patient directly to a tertiary care center. If it is a critical care paramedic call I have the patient for approximately the same time, from our local hospital to the tertiary care center. I will have more latitude in the former situation and would appreciate advice on what I should do fluid-wise with said patient exhibiting signs and symptoms of sepsis. I DON’T HAVE any fancy diagnostic tools, but I can certainly determine temperature, mental status, RR, HR, and BP. I can auscultate lung fields and likely get enough of a history to determine if there is a likely underlying infection.… Read more »
Vote Up4Vote Down  Reply
2 months 18 days ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik

Grant:

Good questions. Sepsis is a very complicated disease, and our understanding continues to evolve. I think these patients are best treated at a tertiary care center with full time intensivists who have the resources to care for these very sick patients.

In terms of fluids during transit. I would always establish a “good” peripheral line. I would then evaluate the patients’ vital signs. If the vitals are “normal” don’t give fluids. If the patient is hypotensive (MAP 105) i would give a 500 cc bolus of NaCl. . However, MOST IMPORTANT is to monitor the response of the fluid bolus on the MAP, HR and resp rate. If no improvement and/or increase in respiratory rate STOP fluids. If the patient appeared to benefit from the first 500cc bolus I would cautiously give a second bolus (of 500cc). Never EVER give a rapid 30cc/kg bolus of fluid; this is a dangerous strategy. When you transfer the patient at the receiving hospital it would be important to convey this information to the receiving team.

Hope this helps.

Paul Marik.

Vote Up4Vote Down  Reply
2 months 18 days ago
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic
Guest
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic

Dr. Marik…It helps enormously. It gives me a set of “protocols” I can understand, appreciate in that they make sense, and have the equipment and knowledge to use in those first 45 or so minutes. I can do my “likely sepsis” patients good, and that’s what I strive to do.

Thank you very much. I will be passing your articles on to our new medical director as soon as she takes over, and working to get our existing protocols reviewed and hopefully changed. Thank you for the time you took to write a reply that applies so incredibly well to what I, as a paramedic/critical care paramedic, need to know. I will actually try to get your reply starting with “Sepsis is a very complicated disease…” and ending with “…this information to the receiving team” put into our sepsis protocols verbatim.

Respectfully,
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic

Vote Up2Vote Down  Reply
2 months 18 days ago
Benjamin Winrow
Guest
Benjamin Winrow

A MAP <105 is hypotensive?! – how hypertensive are American patients usually?

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
2 months 14 days ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik

Benjamin; Thanks for pointing out this obvious error. Should have been MAP < 65 mmHg. Paul

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
2 months 13 days ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik

OOps that should be MAP < 65 mmHg. Sorry about that typo.

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
2 months 13 days ago
Ryan
Guest
Ryan

Elegant discussion!
Major gratitude for sharing your expertise & time!

Vote Up1Vote Down  Reply
2 months 18 days ago
Cyrus Shariat
Guest
Cyrus Shariat
Thank you Dr. Marik for posting these useful lectures. I am an intensivist/neurointensivist at a medium sized community hospital in California. I have a few questions. (1) You mention that PLR or fluid bolus followed by an assessment of change in SV are currently the gold standards in assessment of fluid responsiveness. As your slide mentions, these require a tool to measure SV (NICOM,,USCOM or special a-lines) and in community hospitals, these tools are often not available in the ER or even the ICU. So this makes the PLR a less practical tool to assess pre-load responsiveness. In practice, I believe that many clinicians look at end points after a bolus or PLR such as decrease in heart rate or increase in BP which are intuitive but not necessarily validated. What is your thought on this and which technologies do you use at the bedside in your ICU to measure stroke volume? (2) In addition to a quick assessment of LV fxn/RV function with bedside U/S, I believe that the presence or absence of a B-line pattern lung U/S is extremely useful in determining fluid tolerance. B-lines are a good marker of EVLW, correlate with wedge pressure and are more… Read more »
Vote Up1Vote Down  Reply
2 months 11 days ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik
Cyrus: Good questions,. No simple answers. I summarize my thoughts below: q1.In a resource limited setting one has to rely on ones clinical skills and the tools available. While the change in MAP or heart rate is an inadequate measure of the change in SV, close observation of the patient after a 500cc bolus is a key in determining if this was the right intervention and what to do next. A key factor is understanding the patients pathology and what you are trying to achieve. There is no technology that answers all ones clinical questions. We rely on bedside ECHO, as well as NICOM and PiCCO (when appropriate). However, as clinical medicine moves out of the dark ages, i believe that if a hospital has an ICU is should have the equipment necessary to safely manage these patients. q2 and q3. I agree, B lines have been shown to correlate well with EVLWI. See also my revised post on vena-caval ultrasonography – Dynamic Changes in Carotid Doppler flow is a simple method to assess fluid responsiveness. q4. The concept of the “third space” has been abandoned… it is a space that does not exist.., except in the imagination of the… Read more »
Vote Up2Vote Down  Reply
2 months 11 days ago
Chris
Guest
Chris

Thanks you for this great talk!

What I still can’t get my head around is when to actually give fluids.
With PLR or a bolus you determine whether the patient is fluid responsive or not. But then you add that being fluid responsive doesn’t mean you actually need fluids. So how do I determine the need for fluids is this concept?

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
2 months 15 days ago
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic
Guest
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic

Chris…Read the second paragraph of Dr. Marik’s reply to my question. It starts “In terms of fluids during transit.” This might help. I think Dr. Marik’s answer, contained in this paragraph, makes the whole thing much more clear to me….Grant Jonsson, MS, CCP

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
2 months 15 days ago
Karl Brennan BSN RN CCRN CEN
Guest
Karl Brennan BSN RN CCRN CEN

Dr. Marik can you comment on the recent article in JICM?

J Intensive Care Med. 2017 Jan 1:885066617711882. doi: 10.1177/0885066617711882. [Epub ahead of print]

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
2 months 15 days ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik
Studies such as those by Herran-Monge et al[1] are frequently published in the literature with the sole purpose of trying to justify the resources and effort involved in instituting the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Guidelines. There is no credible high level scientific data that the institution of the SSC Guidelines has specifically and directly reduced the mortality of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The study by Herran-Monge et al in particular has a number of fatal flaws which should have precluded publication. The two populations differ significantly in disease severity and it makes it extremely difficult to make direct comparisons. The authors report that intra-abdominal infection was the commonest source of infection. This finding differs from almost all published sepsis studies, where pneumonia is by far the most common source of infection (approx. 50%). This is particularly relevant as the timing and methods of source control become the most important factor influencing outcome in patients with intra-abdominal infection, and it is likely that this has changed over the 9 year study period. It is extremely important to emphasize that numerous changes have occurred in the management of ICU patients generally and sepsis patients in particular over the last… Read more »
Vote Up4Vote Down  Reply
2 months 14 days ago
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic
Guest
Grant Jonsson, MS, critical care paramedic

Karl…I will be very interested in hearing Dr. Marik’s response to your question. It’s a conundrum!

Vote Up1Vote Down  Reply
2 months 15 days ago
Corinna
Guest
Corinna

In our team we yesterday asked ourselves:
Is it less harmful or even more useful to applicate/increase enteral fluids after (or even while) first stabilisation of your septic patient and further evidence of intravasal volume depletion in Sepsis under the condition that gastric and bowel function is not obviously impaired?

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
1 month 29 days ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik

Corinna: I would not use the GUT as a route of fluid resuscitation in the ICU. This is a generally auseful approach in patients with diarrhea. However, in ICU patients who have a water deficit (not volume deficit) it is appropriate to increase the amount of “free water” provided enterally.

Vote Up1Vote Down  Reply
1 month 29 days ago
Brian
Guest
Brian

Dr. Marik,
How do you assess a patient’s perfusion status? Do you only look at MAP or do you use markers others use such as warm/cool extremities, UOP, lactate, etc.

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
10 days 19 hours ago
Paul Marik
Author
Paul Marik

Brian:

Good question. The most important and first goal of resuscitation is a MAP of at least 65mmHg. Thereafter you want to check peripheral perfusion (esp. temp of knee), heart rate (< 100bpm), UO (not a good sign in septic patient), mentation, etc. Lactate is not a sign or indicator of organ perfusion.

Vote Up0Vote Down  Reply
10 days 14 hours ago
wpDiscuz

Who are We?

Scott Weingart, MDHi, my name is Scott Weingart.
I am an ED Intensivist from New York. Along with my friends, we are attempting to provide and teach Maximally Aggressive Care, Everywhere! From the field to the ICU, EMCrit is about optimal critical care and resuscitation.

Like Us on Facebook

Like Us on Facebook

Subscribe by Email