• B F Geerts, L P H J Aarts, A B Groeneveld, and J R C Jansen.
• Department of Anaesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Albinusdreef 2, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands. b.f.geerts@lumc.nl
• Br J Anaesth. 2011 Aug 1;107(2):150-6.

BackgroundChanges in central venous pressure (CVP) rather than absolute values may be used to guide fluid therapy in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. We conducted a study comparing the changes in the CVP produced by an increase in PEEP and stroke volume variation (SVV) as indicators of fluid responsiveness. Fluid responsiveness was assessed by the changes in cardiac output (CO) produced by passive leg raising (PLR).MethodsIn 20 fully mechanically ventilated patients after cardiac surgery, PEEP was increased +10 cm H2O for 5 min followed by PLR. CVP, SVV, and thermodilution CO were measured before, during, and directly after the PEEP challenge and 30° PLR. The CO increase >7% upon PLR was used to define responders.ResultsTwenty patients were included; of whom, 10 responded to PLR. The increase in CO by PLR directly related (r=0.77, P<0.001) to the increase in CVP by PEEP. PLR responsiveness was predicted by the PEEP-induced increase in CVP [area under receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve 0.99, P<0.001] and by baseline SVV (AUROC 0.90, P=0.003). The AUROC's for dCVP and SVV did not differ significantly (P=0.299).ConclusionsOur data in mechanically ventilated, cardiac surgery patients suggest that the newly defined parameter, PEEP-induced CVP changes, like SVV, appears to be a good parameter to predict fluid responsiveness.

30 keywords...

hide…