Comparing hemodynamic effects with three different measurement devices, of two methods of external leg compression versus passive leg raising in patients after cardiac surgery.

External leg compression (ELC) may increase cardiac output (CO) in fluid-responsive patients like passive leg raising (PLR). We compared the hemodynamic effects of two methods of ELC and PLR measured by thermodilution (COtd), pressure curve analysis Modelflow™ (COmf) and ultra-sound HemoSonic™ (COhs), to evaluate the method with the greatest hemodynamic effect and the most accurate less invasive method to measure that effect. We compared hemodynamic effects of two different ELC methods (circular, A (n = 16), vs. wide, B (n = 13), bandages inflated to 30 cm H2O for 15 min) with PLR prior to each ELC method, in 29 post-operative cardiac surgical patients. Hemodynamic responses were measured with COtd, COmf and COhs. PLR A increased COtd from 6.1 ± 1.7 to 6.3 ± 1.8 L·min(-1) (P = 0.016), and increased COhs from 4.9 ± 1.5 to 5.3 ± 1.6 L·min(-1) (P = 0.001), but did not increase COmf. ELC A increased COtd from 6.4 ± 1.8 to 6.7 ± 1.9 L·min(-1) (P = 0.001) and COmf from 6.9 ± 1.7 to 7.1 ± 1.8 L·min(-1) (P = 0.021), but did not increase COhs. ELC A increased COtd and COmf as in PLR A. PLR B increased COtd from 5.4 ± 1.3 to 5.8 ± 1.4 L·min(-1) (P < 0.001), and COhs from 5.0 ± 1.0 to 5.4 ± 1.0 L·min(-1) (P = 0.013), but not COmf. ELC B increased COtd from 5.2 ± 1.2 to 5.4 ± 1.1 L·min(-1) (P = 0.003), but less than during PLR B (P = 0.012), while COmf and COhs did not change. Bland-Altman and polar plots showed lower limits of agreement with changes in COtd for COmf than for COhs. The circular leg compression increases CO more than bandage compression, and is able to increase CO as in PLR. The less invasive Modelflow™ can detect these changes reasonably well.

Assessment of venous return curve and mean systemic filling pressure in postoperative cardiac surgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the relationship between blood flow and central venous pressure (Pcv) and to estimate mean systemic filling pressure (Pmsf), circulatory compliance, and stressed volume in patients in the intensive care unit. DESIGN: Intervention study. SETTING: Intensive care unit of a university hospital. PATIENTS: Twelve mechanically ventilated postoperative cardiac surgery patients. INTERVENTIONS: Inspiratory holds were performed during normovolemia in supine position (baseline), relative hypovolemia by placing the patients in 30 degree head-up position (hypo), and relative hypervolemia by volume loading with 0.5 L colloid (hyper). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured the relationship between blood flow and Pcv using 12-second inspiratory-hold maneuvers transiently increasing Pcv to three different steady-state levels and monitored the resultant blood flow via the pulse contour method during the last 3 seconds. The Pcv to blood flow relation was linear for all measurements with a slope unaltered by relative volume status. Pmsf decreased with hypo and increased with hyper (18.8 +/- 4.5 mm Hg, to 14.5 +/- 3.0 mm Hg, to 29.1 +/- 5.2 mm Hg [baseline, hypo, hyper, respectively, p < 0.05]). Baseline total circulatory compliance was 0.98 mL x mm Hg x kg and stressed volume was 1677 mL. CONCLUSIONS: Pmsf can be determined in intensive care patients with an intact circulation with use of inspiratory pause procedures, making serial measures of circulatory compliance and circulatory stressed volume feasible.

Assessing fluid responses after coronary surgery: role of mathematical coupling of global end-diastolic volume to cardiac output measured by transpulmonary thermodilution.

BACKGROUND: Mathematical coupling may explain in part why cardiac filling volumes obtained by transpulmonary thermodilution may better predict and monitor responses of cardiac output to fluid loading than pressures obtained by pulmonary artery catheters (PACs). METHODS: Eleven consecutive patients with hypovolaemia after coronary surgery and a PAC, allowing central venous pressure (CVP) and continuous cardiac index (CCIp) measurements, received a femoral artery catheter for transpulmonary thermodilution measurements of global end-diastolic blood volume index (GEDVI) and cardiac index (CItp). One to five colloid fluid-loading steps of 250 ml were done in each patient (n = 48 total). RESULTS: Fluid responses were predicted and monitored similarly by CItp and CCIp, whereas CItp and CCIp correlated at r = 0.70 (P < 0.001) with a bias of 0.40 l min(-1) m(-2). Changes in volumes (and not in CVP) related to changes in CItp and not in CCIp. Changes in CVP and GEDVI similarly related to changes in CItp, after exclusion of two patients with greatest CItp outliers (as compared to CCIp). Changes in GEDVI correlated better to changes in CItp when derived from the same thermodilution curve than to changes in CItp of unrelated curves and changes in CCIp. CONCLUSIONS: After coronary surgery, fluid responses can be similarly assessed by intermittent transpulmonary and continuous pulmonary thermodilution methods, in spite of overestimation of CCIp by CItp. Filling pressures are poor monitors of fluid responses and superiority of GEDVI can be caused, at least in part, by mathematical coupling when cardiac volume and output are derived from the same thermodilution curve.

Effect of positive pressure on venous return in volume-loaded cardiac surgical patients.

The hemodynamic effects of increases in airway pressure (Paw) are related in part to Paw-induced increases in right atrial pressure (Pra), the downstream pressure for venous return, thus decreasing the pressure gradient for venous return. However, numerous animal and clinical studies have shown that venous return is often sustained during ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Potentially, PEEP-induced diaphragmatic descent increases abdominal pressure (Pabd). We hypothesized that an increase in Paw induced by PEEP would minimally alter venous return because the associated increase in Pra would be partially offset by a concomitant increase in Pabd. Thus we studied the acute effects of graded increases of Paw on Pra, Pabd, and cardiac output by application of inspiratory-hold maneuvers in sedated and paralyzed humans. Forty-two patients were studied in the intensive care unit after coronary artery bypass surgery during hemodynamically stable, fluid-resuscitated conditions. Paw was progressively increased in steps of 2 to 4 cmH(2)O from 0 to 20 cmH(2)O in sequential 25-s inspiratory-hold maneuvers. Right ventricular (RV) cardiac output (CO(td)) and RV ejection fraction (EF(rv)) were measured at 5 s into the inspiratory-hold maneuver by the thermodilution technique. RV end-diastolic volume and stroke volume were calculated from EF(rv) and heart rate data, and Pra was measured from the pulmonary artery catheter. Pabd was estimated as bladder pressure. We found that, although increasing Paw progressively increased Pra, neither CO(td) nor RV end-diastolic volume changed. The ratio of change (Delta) in Paw to Delta Pra was 0.32 +/- 0.20. The ratio of Delta Pra to Delta CO(td) was 0.05 +/- 00.15 l x min(-1) x mmHg(-1). However, Pabd increased such that the ratio of Delta Pra to Delta Pabd was 0.73 +/- 0.36, meaning that most of the increase in Pra was reflected in increases in Pabd. We conclude that, in hemodynamically stable fluid-resuscitated postoperative surgical patients, inspiratory-hold maneuvers with increases in Paw of up to 20 cmH(2)O have minimal effects on cardiac output, primarily because of an in-phase-associated pressurization of the abdominal compartment associated with compression of the liver and squeezing of the lungs.

Relative value of pressures and volumes in assessing fluid responsiveness after valvular and coronary artery surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cardiac function may differ after valvular (VS) and coronary artery (CAS) surgery and this may affect assessment of fluid responsiveness. The aim of the study was to compare VS and CAS in the value of cardiac filling pressures and volumes herein. METHODS: There were eight consecutive patients after VS and eight after CAS, with femoral and pulmonary artery catheters in place. In each patient, five sequential fluid loading steps of 250 ml of colloid each were done. We measured central venous pressure (CVP), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP) and, by transpulmonary thermodilution, cardiac index (CI) and global end-diastolic (GEDVI) and intrathoracic blood volume (ITBVI) indices. Fluid responsiveness was defined by a CI increase >5% or >10% per step. RESULTS: Global ejection fraction was lower and PAOP was higher after VS than CAS. In responding steps after VS (n=9-14) PAOP and volumes increased, while CVP and volumes increased in responding steps (n=12-19) after CAS. Baseline PAOP was lower in responding steps after VS only. Hence, baseline PAOP as well as changes in PAOP and volumes were of predictive value after VS and changes in CVP and volumes after CAS, in receiver operating characteristic curves. After VS, PAOP and volume changes equally correlated to CI changes. After CAS, only changes in CVP and volumes correlated to those in CI. CONCLUSIONS: While volumes are equally useful in monitoring fluid responsiveness, the predictive and monitoring value of PAOP is greater after VS than after CAS. In contrast, the CVP is of similar value as volume measurements in monitoring fluid responsiveness after CAS. The different value of pressures rather than of volumes between surgery types is likely caused by systolic left ventricular dysfunction in VS. The study suggests an effect of systolic cardiac function on optimal parameters of fluid responsiveness and superiority of the pulmonary artery catheter over transpulmonary dilution, for haemodynamic monitoring of VS patients.