• Michael K Dahl, Simon T Vistisen, Jacob Koefoed-Nielsen, and Anders Larsson.
• Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, North Denmark Region, Aalborg Hospital - Aarhus University Hospitals, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000 Aalborg, Denmark. mida@rn.dk
• Crit Care. 2009 Jan 1;13(2):R39.

IntroductionFluid responsiveness prediction is difficult in spontaneously breathing patients. Because the swings in intrathoracic pressure are minor during spontaneous breathing, dynamic parameters like pulse pressure variation (PPV) and systolic pressure variation (SPV) are usually small. We hypothesized that during spontaneous breathing, inspiratory and/or expiratory resistors could induce high arterial pressure variations at hypovolemia and low variations at normovolemia and hypervolemia. Furthermore, we hypothesized that SPV and PPV could predict fluid responsiveness under these conditions.MethodsEight prone, anesthetized and spontaneously breathing pigs (20 to 25 kg) were subjected to a sequence of 30% hypovolemia, normovolemia, and 20% and 40% hypervolemia. At each volemic level, the pigs breathed in a randomized order either through an inspiratory and/or an expiratory threshold resistor (7.5 cmH2O) or only through the tracheal tube without any resistor. Hemodynamic and respiratory variables were measured during the breathing modes. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a 15% increase in stroke volume (DeltaSV) following fluid loading.ResultsStroke volume was significantly lower at hypovolemia compared with normovolemia, but no differences were found between normovolemia and 20% or 40% hypervolemia. Compared with breathing through no resistor, SPV was magnified by all resistors at hypovolemia whereas there were no changes at normovolemia and hypervolemia. PPV was magnified by the inspiratory resistor and the combined inspiratory and expiratory resistor. Regression analysis of SPV or PPV versus DeltaSV showed the highest R2 (0.83 for SPV and 0.52 for PPV) when the expiratory resistor was applied. The corresponding sensitivity and specificity for prediction of fluid responsiveness were 100% and 100%, respectively, for SPV and 100% and 81%, respectively, for PPV.ConclusionsInspiratory and/or expiratory threshold resistors magnified SPV and PPV in spontaneously breathing pigs during hypovolemia. Using the expiratory resistor SPV and PPV predicted fluid responsiveness with good sensitivity and specificity.

15 keywords...

hide…