Respiratory Variation in Carotid Artery Peak Systolic Velocity Is Unable to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in Spontaneously Breathing Critically Ill Patients When Assessed by Novice Physician Sonologists.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory variation in carotid artery peak systolic velocity (ΔVpeak) assessed by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been proposed as a noninvasive means to predict fluid responsiveness. We aimed to evaluate the ability of carotid ΔVpeak as assessed by novice physician sonologists to predict fluid responsiveness. METHODS: This study was conducted in 2 intensive care units. Spontaneously breathing, nonintubated patients with signs of volume depletion were included. Patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter, cardiogenic, obstructive or neurogenic shock, or those for whom further intravenous (IV) fluid administration would be harmful were excluded. Three novice physician sonologists were trained in POCUS assessment of carotid ΔVpeak. They assessed the carotid ΔVpeak in study participants prior to the administration of a 500 mL IV fluid bolus. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in cardiac index as measured using bioreactance. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants were enrolled, 50 (58.1%) were fluid responders. Carotid ΔVpeak performed poorly at predicting fluid responsiveness. Test characteristics for the optimum carotid ΔVpeak of 8.0% were: area under the receiver operating curve = 0.61 (95% CI: 0.48-0.73), sensitivity = 72.0% (95% CI: 58.3-82.56), specificity = 50.0% (95% CI: 34.5-65.5). CONCLUSIONS: Novice physician sonologists using POCUS are unable to predict fluid responsiveness using carotid ΔVpeak. Until further research identifies key limiting factors, clinicians should use caution directing IV fluid resuscitation using carotid ΔVpeak.

Performance of a 25% Inferior Vena Cava Collapsibility in Detecting Fluid Responsiveness When Assessed by Novice Versus Expert Physician Sonologists.

OBJECTIVES: Inferior vena cava collapsibility (cIVC) measured by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been proposed as a noninvasive means of assessing fluid responsiveness. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the performance of a 25% cIVC cutoff value to detect fluid responsiveness among spontaneously breathing intensive care unit (ICU) patients when assessed with POCUS by novice versus expert physician sonologists. METHODS: Prospective observational study of spontaneously breathing ICU patients. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a >10% increase in cardiac index following a 500 mL fluid bolus, measured by bioreactance. Novice sonologist measured cIVC with POCUS. Their measurements were later compared to an expert physician sonologist who independently reviewed the POCUS images and assessed cIVCs. RESULTS: Of the 85 participants, 44 (52%) were fluid responders. A 25% cIVC cutoff value performed better when assessed by expert sonologists than novice physician sonologists (receiver-operator characteristic curve, ROC = 0.82 [0.74-0.88] vs ROC = 0.69 [0.60-0.77]). CONCLUSIONS: A 25% cIVC cutoff value measured by POCUS detects fluid responsiveness. However, the experience of the physician sonologist affects test performance and should be considered when interpreting and clinically using cIVC to direct intravenous fluid resuscitation.

Change in Carotid Blood Flow and Carotid Corrected Flow Time Assessed by Novice Sonologists Fails to Determine Fluid Responsiveness in Spontaneously Breathing Intensive Care Unit Patients.

Measurement of carotid blood flow (CBF) and corrected carotid flow time (ccFT) has been proposed as a non-invasive means of determining fluid responsiveness. We evaluated the ability of CBF and ccFT as assessed by novice sonologists to determine fluid responsiveness in intensive care unit patients. Three novice physician sonologists performed carotid ultrasounds before and after a fluid bolus and calculated changes in CBF and ccFT. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a ≥10% increase in cardiac index as measured using bioreactance. Of 112 participants, 56 (50%) were fluid responders. Changes in CBF and ccFT performed poorly at determining fluid responsiveness: 19 mL/min (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.58, 95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.68) and 6 ms (0.59, 0.46-0.65) respectively. Novice physician sonologists are unable to determine fluid responsiveness using CBF or ccFT. Further research is needed to identify the key limiting factors in using carotid ultrasound to determine fluid responsiveness.