Comparative evaluation of central venous pressure and sonographic inferior vena cava variability in assessing fluid responsiveness in septic shock.

Manjri Garg, Jyotsna Sen, Sandeep Goyal, Dhruva Chaudhry
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of central venous pressure and sonographic inferior vena cava variability in assessing fluid responsiveness in septic shock.","authors":"Manjri Garg, Jyotsna Sen, Sandeep Goyal, Dhruva Chaudhry","doi":"10.4103/0972-5229.195706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Fluid infusion, the most critical step in the resuscitation of patients with septic shock, needs preferably continuous invasive hemodynamic monitoring. The study was planned to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasonographically measured inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC CI) in comparison to central venous pressure (CVP) in predicting fluid responsiveness in septic shock.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty-six patients of septic shock requiring ventilatory support (invasive/noninvasive) were included. Patients with congestive heart failure, raised intra-abdominal pressure, and poor echo window were excluded from the study. They were randomly divided into two groups based on mode of fluid resuscitation - Group I (CVP) and Group II (IVC CI). Primary end-points were mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥65 mmHg and CVP >12 mmHg or IVC CI <20% in Groups I and II, respectively. Patients were followed till achievement of end-points or maximum of 6 h. Outcome variables (pulse rate, MAP, urine output, pH, base deficit, and ScvO<sub>2</sub> ) were serially measured till the end of the study. Survival at 2 and 4 weeks was used as secondary end-point.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primary end-point was reached in 31 patients (15 in Group I and 16 in Group II). Fluid infusion, by either method, had increased CVP and decreased IVC CI with resultant negative correlation between them (Pearson correlation coefficient -0.626). There was no significant difference in the amount of fluid infused and time to reach end-point in two groups. Comparison in outcome variables at baseline and end-point showed no significant difference including mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CVP and IVC CI are negatively correlated with fluid resuscitation, and both methods can be used for resuscitation, with IVC CI being noninferior to CVP.</p>","PeriodicalId":49658,"journal":{"name":"Progress of Theoretical Physics","volume":"82 1","pages":"708-713"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5225771/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress of Theoretical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.195706","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Fluid infusion, the most critical step in the resuscitation of patients with septic shock, needs preferably continuous invasive hemodynamic monitoring. The study was planned to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasonographically measured inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC CI) in comparison to central venous pressure (CVP) in predicting fluid responsiveness in septic shock.

Materials and methods: Thirty-six patients of septic shock requiring ventilatory support (invasive/noninvasive) were included. Patients with congestive heart failure, raised intra-abdominal pressure, and poor echo window were excluded from the study. They were randomly divided into two groups based on mode of fluid resuscitation - Group I (CVP) and Group II (IVC CI). Primary end-points were mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥65 mmHg and CVP >12 mmHg or IVC CI <20% in Groups I and II, respectively. Patients were followed till achievement of end-points or maximum of 6 h. Outcome variables (pulse rate, MAP, urine output, pH, base deficit, and ScvO2 ) were serially measured till the end of the study. Survival at 2 and 4 weeks was used as secondary end-point.

Results: Primary end-point was reached in 31 patients (15 in Group I and 16 in Group II). Fluid infusion, by either method, had increased CVP and decreased IVC CI with resultant negative correlation between them (Pearson correlation coefficient -0.626). There was no significant difference in the amount of fluid infused and time to reach end-point in two groups. Comparison in outcome variables at baseline and end-point showed no significant difference including mortality.

Conclusion: CVP and IVC CI are negatively correlated with fluid resuscitation, and both methods can be used for resuscitation, with IVC CI being noninferior to CVP.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中心静脉压和超声下腔静脉变异性在评估脓毒性休克患者输液反应性方面的比较评估。
目的:输液是脓毒性休克患者复苏过程中最关键的一步,最好需要持续的有创血液动力学监测。本研究计划评估超声波测量的下腔静脉塌陷指数(IVC CI)与中心静脉压(CVP)相比在预测脓毒性休克患者输液反应性方面的效果:纳入 36 例需要呼吸支持(有创/无创)的脓毒性休克患者。研究排除了充血性心力衰竭、腹内压升高和回声窗不佳的患者。根据液体复苏的方式,他们被随机分为两组--第一组(CVP)和第二组(IVC CI)。主要终点为平均动脉压(MAP)≥65 mmHg 和 CVP >12 mmHg 或 IVC CI 2),连续测量直至研究结束。2周和4周的存活率作为次要终点:结果:31 名患者(I 组 15 人,II 组 16 人)达到了主要终点。无论是哪种输液方法,都会增加 CVP 和降低 IVC CI,两者之间呈负相关(皮尔逊相关系数 -0.626)。两组的输液量和达到终点的时间没有明显差异。基线和终点时的结果变量比较显示,包括死亡率在内的结果变量无明显差异:结论:CVP 和 IVC CI 与液体复苏呈负相关,两种方法都可用于复苏,IVC CI 并不比 CVP 差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Progress of Theoretical Physics
Progress of Theoretical Physics 物理-物理:综合
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Heavy and Chronic Cannabis Addiction does not Impact Motor Function: A BOLD-fMRI Study. Robust differential expression testing for single-cell CRISPR screens at low multiplicity of infection. Analysis of the Correlation of the Lamina Papyracea-to-Midline Distance with the Location of Anterior Ethmoidal Artery and Keros Classification. The long road to bloom in conifers. Risks to the 340B Drug Pricing Program Related to Manufacturer Restrictions on Drug Availability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1