Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Pulse pressure variation and prediction of fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes.

Clinics 2012 July
OBJECTIVE: To determine the utility of pulse pressure variation (ΔRESP PP) in predicting fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes (V T) and to investigate whether a lower ΔRESP PP cut-off value should be used when patients are ventilated with low tidal volumes.

METHOD: This cross-sectional observational study included 37 critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure who required fluid challenge. The patients were sedated and mechanically ventilated with a V T of 6-7 ml/kg ideal body weight, which was monitored with a pulmonary artery catheter and an arterial line. The mechanical ventilation and hemodynamic parameters, including ΔRESP PP, were measured before and after fluid challenge with 1,000 ml crystalloids or 500 ml colloids. Fluid responsiveness was defined as an increase in the cardiac index of at least 15%. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01569308.

RESULTS: A total of 17 patients were classified as responders. Analysis of the area under the ROC curve (AUC) showed that the optimal cut-off point for ΔRESP PP to predict fluid responsiveness was 10% (AUC = 0.74). Adjustment of the ΔRESP PP to account for driving pressure did not improve the accuracy (AUC = 0.76). A ΔRESP PP ≥ 10% was a better predictor of fluid responsiveness than central venous pressure (AUC = 0.57) or pulmonary wedge pressure (AUC = 051). Of the 37 patients, 25 were in septic shock. The AUC for ΔRESP PP ≥ 10% to predict responsiveness in patients with septic shock was 0.484 (sensitivity, 78%; specificity, 93%).

CONCLUSION: The parameter D RESP PP has limited value in predicting fluid responsiveness in patients who are ventilated with low tidal volumes, but a ΔRESP PP>10% is a significant improvement over static parameters. A ΔRESP PP ≥ 10% may be particularly useful for identifying responders in patients with septic shock.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app