Journals / Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation / 2022 / Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 1

Invasive and Non-invasive Dynamic Parameters to Predict Fluid Responsiveness After Off-pump Coronary Surgery

Pages
59–64
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Thus, these dynamic parameters can be used to guide fluid therapy during the early postoperative period after off-pump coronary surgery.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to assess the predictive value of invasive and non-invasive dynamic parameters for evaluation of fluid responsiveness after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The patients with an increase in cardiac index ≥ 15% after the test were defined as fluid responders.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Thus, these dynamic parameters can be used to guide fluid therapy during the early postoperative period after off-pump coronary surgery.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: This study aimed to assess the predictive value of invasive and non-invasive dynamic parameters for evaluation of fluid responsiveness after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Methods: Thirty-two adult patients after off-pump coronary surgery were enrolled into a single-center pilot prospective observational study. After arrival to the intensive care unit, all patients received standard fluid challenge test to assess fluid responsiveness. The patients with an increase in cardiac index ≥ 15% after the test were defined as fluid responders. We measured pulse pressure variation using 2 monitoring systems (PPVPiCCO and PPVNK), stroke volume variation, heart–lung interaction index, and plethysmogram variability index before and after standard fluid challenge test. Results: After intensive care unit admission, the absolute values of stroke volume variation, PPVPiCCO, PPVNK, and heart–lung interaction index were significantly higher among fluid responders (P < .05). Response to standard fluid challenge test was predicted by dynamic assessment of PPVPiCCO (area under the curve 0.84), PPVNK (area under the curve 0.71), stroke volume variation (area under the curve 0.77), and heart–lung interaction index (area under the curve 0.77) (P < .05). The plethysmogram variability index value did not demonstrate any predictive ability regarding fluid responsiveness (area under the curve 0.5, P = .1). Conclusions: In patients after off-pump coronary surgery, both invasive parameters such as pulse pressure and stroke volume variations and non-invasive parameter such as heart–lung interaction index are able to predict fluid responsiveness. Thus, these dynamic parameters can be used to guide fluid therapy during the early postoperative period after off-pump coronary surgery.

🔖

Cite This Article

FOT, E., IZOTOVA, N. N., SMETKIN, A. A., KUZKOV, V., KIROV, M. (2022). Invasive and Non-invasive Dynamic Parameters to Predict Fluid Responsiveness After Off-pump Coronary Surgery. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 1, 59–64. https://ajindex.com/articles/414172

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Lomivorotov VV, Efremov SM, Kirov MY, Fominskiy EV, Karaskov AM. Low-cardiac-output syndrome after cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2017
  2. 31(1):291-308. [CrossRef] 2. Alvarado Sánchez JI, Amaya Zúñiga WF, Monge García MI. Predictors to intravenous fluid responsiveness. J Intensive Care Med. 2018
  3. 33(4):227-240. [CrossRef] 3. Silva JM, de Oliveira AM, Nogueira FA, et al. The effect of excess fluid balance on the mortality rate of surgical patients: a multicenter prospective study. Crit Care. 2013
  4. 17(6):R288. [CrossRef] 4. Benes J, Kirov M, Kuzkov V, et al. Fluid therapy: double-edged sword during critical care? BioMed Res Int. 2015
  5. 729075. [CrossRef] 5. Kumar A, Anel R, Bunnell E, et al. Pulmonary artery occlusion pressure and central venous pressure fail to predict ventricular filling volume, cardiac performance, or the response to volume infusion in normal subjects. Crit Care Med. 2004
  6. 32(3):691 -699. [CrossRef] 6. Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest. 2008
  7. 134(1):172-178. [CrossRef] 7. Marik PE, Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med. 2013
  8. 41(7):1774-1781. [CrossRef] 8. Marik PE, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. Ann Intensive Care. 2011
  9. 1(1):1. [CrossRef] 9. Fot EV, Izotova NN, Smetkin AA, Kuzkov VV, Kirov MY. Dynamic tests to predict fluid responsiveness after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2020
  10. 34(4):926-931. [CrossRef] 10. Jozwiak M, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in ventilated patients. Ann Transl Med. 2018
  11. 6(18):352. [CrossRef] 11. Rex S, Brose S, Metzelder S, et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in patients during cardiac surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2004
  12. 93(6):782 -788. [CrossRef] 12. Reuter DA, Felbinger TW, Schmidt C, et al. Stroke volume variation for assessment of cardiac responsiveness to volume loading in mechanically ventilated patients after cardiac surgery. Intensive Care Med. 2002
  13. 28(4):392-398. [CrossRef] 13. Bedford RF, Wollman H. Complications of percutaneous radial-artery cannulation: an objective prospective study in man. Anesthesiology. 1973
  14. 38(3):228-236. [CrossRef] 14. Jones RM, Hill AB, Nahrwold ML, Bolles RE. The effect of method of radial artery cannulation on postcannulation blood f