Optimizing Fluid Management Guided by Volumetric Parameters in Patients with Sepsis and ARDS.

We compared two de-escalation strategies guided by either extravascular lung water or global end-diastolic volume-oriented algorithms in patients with sepsis and ARDS. Sixty patients with sepsis and ARDS were randomized to receive de-escalation fluid therapy, guided either by the extravascular lung water index (EVLWI, n = 30) or the global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI, n = 30). In cases of GEDVI > 650 mL/m2 or EVLWI > 10 mL/kg, diuretics and/or controlled ultrafiltration were administered to achieve the cumulative 48-h fluid balance in the range of 0 to -3000 mL. During 48 h of goal-directed de-escalation therapy, we observed a decrease in the SOFA score (p < 0.05). Extravascular lung water decreased only in the EVLWI-oriented group (p < 0.001). In parallel, PaO2/FiO2 increased by 30% in the EVLWI group and by 15% in the GEDVI group (p < 0.05). The patients with direct ARDS demonstrated better responses to dehydration therapy concerning arterial oxygenation and lung fluid balance. In sepsis-induced ARDS, both fluid management strategies, based either on GEDVI or EVLWI, improved arterial oxygenation and attenuated organ dysfunction. The de-escalation therapy was more efficient for direct ARDS.

The Validation of Cardiac Index and Stroke-Volume Variation Measured by the Pulse-Wave Transit Time-Analysis Versus Conventional Pulse-Contour Analysis After Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the reliability of cardiac index (CI) and stroke-volume variation (SVV) measured by the pulse-wave transit-time (PWTT) method using estimated continuous cardiac output (esCCO) technique with conventional pulse-contour analysis after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB). DESIGN: A single-center, prospective, observational study. SETTING: At a 1,000-bed university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21 patients were enrolled after elective OPCAB. INTERVENTIONS: The study authors performed a method comparison study with simultaneous measurement of CI and SVV based on the esCCO technique (CIesCCO and esSVV, correspondingly) and pulse-contour analysis (CIPCA and SVVPCA, correspondingly). As a secondary analysis, they also assessed the trending ability of CIesCCO versus CIPCA. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors analyzed 178 measurement pairs for CI, and 174 pairs for SVV during the 10 study stages. The mean bias between CIesCCO and CIPCA was 0.06 L min/m2, with limits of agreement of ± 0.92 L min/m2 and a percentage error (PE) of 35.3%. The analysis of the trending ability of CI measured by PWTT revealed a concordance rate of 70%. The mean bias between esSVV and SVVPCA was -6.1%, with limits of agreement of ± 15.5% and a PE of 137%. CONCLUSIONS: The overall performance of CIesCCO and esSVV versus CIPCA and SVVPCA is not clinically acceptable. A further improvement of the PWTT algorithm may be required for an accurate and precise assessment of CI and SVV.

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

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.