The use of static and dynamic haemodynamic parameters before volume expansion: A prospective observational study in six French intensive care units

Improving the precision of shock resuscitation by predicting fluid responsiveness with machine learning and arterial blood pressure waveform data

Fluid bolus therapy (FBT) is fundamental to the management of circulatory shock in critical care but balancing the benefits and toxicities of FBT has proven challenging in individual patients. Improved predictors of the hemodynamic response to a fluid bolus, commonly referred to as a fluid challenge, are needed to limit non-beneficial fluid administration and to enable automated clinical decision support and patient-specific precision critical care management. In this study we retrospectively analyzed data from 394 fluid boluses from 58 pigs subjected to either hemorrhagic or distributive shock. All animals had continuous blood pressure and cardiac output monitored throughout the study. Using this data, we developed a machine learning (ML) model to predict the hemodynamic response to a fluid challenge using only arterial blood pressure waveform data as the input. A Random Forest binary classifier referred to as the ML fluid responsiveness algorithm (MLFRA) was trained to detect fluid responsiveness (FR), defined as a ≥ 15% change in cardiac stroke volume after a fluid challenge. We then compared its performance to pulse pressure variation, a commonly used metric of FR. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), confusion matrix metrics, and calibration curves plotting predicted probabilities against observed outcomes. Across multiple train/test splits and feature selection methods designed to assess performance in the setting of small sample size conditions typical of large animal experiments, the MLFRA achieved an average AUROC, recall (sensitivity), specificity, and precision of 0.82, 0.86, 0.62. and 0.76, respectively. In the same datasets, pulse pressure variation had an AUROC, recall, specificity, and precision of 0.73, 0.91, 0.49, and 0.71, respectively. The MLFRA was generally well-calibrated across its range of predicted probabilities and appeared to perform equally well across physiologic conditions. These results suggest that ML, using only inputs from arterial blood pressure monitoring, may substantially improve the accuracy of predicting FR compared to the use of pulse pressure variation. If generalizable, these methods may enable more effective, automated precision management of critically ill patients with circulatory shock.

RESPIRATION-RELATED VARIATIONS IN CENTRAL VENOUS PRESSURE AS PREDICTORS OF FLUID RESPONSIVENESS IN SPONTANEOUSLY BREATHING PATIENTS

ABSTRACT

Objective : The hemodynamic parameters used to accurately predict fluid responsiveness (FR) in spontaneously breathing patients (SB) require specific material and expertise. Measurements of the central venous pressure (CVP) are relatively simple and, importantly, are feasible in many critically ill patients. We analyzed the accuracy of respiration-related variations in CVP (vCVP) to predict FR in SB patients and examined the optimization of its measurement using a standardized, deep inspiratory maneuver. Patients and Methods : We performed a monocentric, prospective, diagnostic evaluation. Spontaneously breathing patients in intensive care units with a central venous catheter were prospectively included. The vCVP was measured while the patient was spontaneously breathing, both with (vCVP-st) and without (vCVP-ns) a standardized inspiratory maneuver, and calculated as: Minimum inspiratory v-wave peak pressure - Maximum expiratory v-wave peak pressure. A passive leg raising-induced increase in the left ventricular outflow tract velocity-time integral ≥10% defined FR. Results : Among 63 patients, 38 (60.3%) presented FR. The vCVP-ns was not significantly different between responders and nonresponders (-4.9 mm Hg [-7.5 to -3.1] vs. -4.1 mm Hg [-5.4 to 2.8], respectively; P = 0.15). The vCVP-st was lower in responders than nonresponders (-9.7 mm Hg [-13.9 to -6.2] vs. -3.6 mm Hg [-10.6 to -1.6], respectively; P = 0.004). A vCVP-st < -4.7 mm Hg predicted FR with 89.5% sensitivity, a specificity of 56.0%, and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86) ( P = 0.004). Conclusion : When a central venous catheter is present, elevated values for vCVP-st may be useful to identify spontaneously breathing patients unresponsive to volume expansion. Nevertheless, the necessity of performing a standardized, deep-inspiration maneuver may limit its clinical application.

Non-invasive assessment of Pulse Wave Transit Time (PWTT) is a poor predictor for intraoperative fluid responsiveness: a prospective observational trial (best-PWTT study)

BACKGROUND

Aim of this study is to test the predictive value of Pulse Wave Transit Time (PWTT) for fluid responsiveness in comparison to the established fluid responsiveness parameters pulse pressure (ΔPP) and corrected flow time (FTc) during major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Forty patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were enrolled with continuous monitoring of PWTT (LifeScope® Modell J BSM-9101 Nihon Kohden Europe GmbH, Rosbach, Germany) and stroke volume (Esophageal Doppler Monitoring CardioQ-ODM®, Deltex Medical Ltd, Chichester, UK). In case of hypovolemia (difference in pulse pressure [∆PP] ≥ 9%, corrected flow time [FTc] ≤ 350 ms) a fluid bolus of 7 ml/kg ideal body weight was administered. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and corresponding areas under the curve (AUCs) were used to compare different methods of determining PWTT. A Wilcoxon test was used to discriminate fluid responders (increase in stroke volume of ≥ 10%) from non-responders. The predictive value of PWTT for fluid responsiveness was compared by testing for differences between ROC curves of PWTT, ΔPP and FTc using the methods by DeLong.

RESULTS

AUCs (area under the ROC-curve) to predict fluid responsiveness for PWTT-parameters were 0.61 (raw c finger Q), 0.61 (raw c finger R), 0.57 (raw c ear Q), 0.53 (raw c ear R), 0.54 (raw non-c finger Q), 0.52 (raw non-c finger R), 0.50 (raw non-c ear Q), 0.55 (raw non-c ear R), 0.63 (∆ c finger Q), 0.61 (∆ c finger R), 0.64 (∆ c ear Q), 0.66 (∆ c ear R), 0.59 (∆ non-c finger Q), 0.57 (∆ non-c finger R), 0.57 (∆ non-c ear Q), 0.61 (∆ non-c ear R) [raw measurements vs. ∆ = respiratory variation; c = corrected measurements according to Bazett's formula vs. non-c = uncorrected measurements; Q vs. R = start of PWTT-measurements with Q- or R-wave in ECG; finger vs. ear = pulse oximetry probe location]. Hence, the highest AUC to predict fluid responsiveness by PWTT was achieved by calculating its respiratory variation (∆PWTT), with a pulse oximeter attached to the earlobe, using the R-wave in ECG, and correction by Bazett's formula (AUC best-PWTT 0.66, 95% CI 0.54-0.79). ∆PWTT was sufficient to discriminate fluid responders from non-responders (p = 0.029). No difference in predicting fluid responsiveness was found between best-PWTT and ∆PP (AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.51-0.79; p = 0.88), or best-PWTT and FTc (AUC 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.75; p = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

ΔPWTT shows poor ability to predict fluid responsiveness intraoperatively. Moreover, established alternatives ΔPP and FTc did not perform better.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prior to enrolement on clinicaltrials.gov (NC T03280953; date of registration 13/09/2017).

Different preoperative fluids do not affect the hemodynamic status but gastric volume: results of a randomized crossover pilot study

Background and objective

Inferior vena cava (IVC) examination has been reported as a noninvasive method for evaluating the hemodynamic state. We conducted this crossover pilot study to investigate the effects of the administration of water and high-carbohydrate-containing fluids on the hemodynamic status of volunteers through collapsibility index of IVC (IVCCI) measurement.

Methods

Twenty volunteers were randomly assigned to a water or high-carbohydrate group according to computer-generated random numbers in a 1:1 ratio. In the water group, volunteers received water (5 mL/kg), and in the high-carbohydrate group, patients received carbohydrate drinks (5 mL/kg). Respiratory variations in the IVC diameter, gastric volume, and blood pressure and heart rates in erect and supine positions were measured at admission (T1), 1 h (T2), 2 h (T3), 3 h (T4), and 4 h (T5).

Results

When considering participants with an IVCCI of more than 42%, there were no significant differences between the water and carbohydrate drink groups at each time point (all p > 0.05). At T2, more participants had an empty stomach in water group than in carbohydrate drink group (p < 0.001). At T3, 30% of the participants could not empty their stomachs in carbohydrate drink group. However, with regard to the number of volunteers with empty stomach at T3, there was no significant difference between water and carbohydrate drink group. Repeated measures data analysis demonstrated that IVCCI showed no significant differences over time (p = 0.063 for T1-T5). There were no differences between water and carbohydrate drinks (p = 0.867).

Conclusion

Our results suggested that neither water nor carbohydrate drinking affected the hemodynamic status through IVCCI measurement over time, up to 4 h after drinking. Furthermore, carbohydrate drinking might delay gastric emptying at 1 h, but not 2 h after drinking, in comparison with water.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01697-3.

An email-based survey of practice regarding hemodynamic monitoring and management in children with septic shock in China

BACKGROUND

Understanding current hemodynamic monitoring (HM) practice patterns is essential to determine education and training strategies in China. The survey was to describe the practice of HM and management in children with septic shock in China.

METHODS

We conducted an Email-based survey of members of sub-association of pediatric intensive care physicians. The questionnaire consisted of 22 questions and gathered the following information: (I) general information on the hospitals, respective ICUs and participants, (II) the availability of technical equipment and parameters of HM and (III) management simulation of septic shock in three clinical case vignettes.

RESULTS

Surveys were received from 68 institutions (87.2%) and 368 questionnaires (response-rate 45.1%) were included. Basic HM (93-100%) were reported as the most utilized parameters, followed by advanced HM which included central venous pressure (CVP) (56.0%), cardiac output (53.5%), and central venous oxygen saturation (36.7%), 61.1% (225/368) of respondents stated the utilization of non-invasive HM equipment. The factors such as ICU specialist training center (P=0.003) and more than 30 cases of septic shock per year (P=0.002) were related to the utilization of non-invasive monitoring equipment. In the simulated case vignette, 49.7% (183/368) of respondents reported performing fluid responsiveness and volume status (FR-VS) assessment. Despite differences in training centers (P=0.005) and educational backgrounds (P=0.030), FR-VS assessment was not related to the volume expansion decision.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a large variability in use advanced HM parameters, an increasing awareness and acceptance of non-invasive HM devices and a potential need for hemodynamic education and training in pediatric intensive care medicine in China.

Measurement site of inferior vena cava diameter affects the accuracy with which fluid responsiveness can be predicted in spontaneously breathing patients: a post hoc analysis of two prospective cohorts

Background

The collapsibility index of the inferior vena cava (cIVC) has potential for predicting fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients, but a standardized approach for measuring the inferior vena cava diameter has yet to be established.

The aim was to test the accuracy of different measurement sites of inferior vena cava diameter to predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with sepsis-related circulatory failure and examine the influence of a standardized breathing manoeuvre.

Results

Among the 81 patients included in the study, the median Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II was 34 (24; 42). Sepsis was of pulmonary origin in 49 patients (60%). Median volume expansion during the 24 h prior to study inclusion was 1000 mL (0; 2000). Patients were not severely ill: none were intubated, only 20% were on vasopressors, and all were apparently able to perform a standardized breathing exercise. Forty-one (51%) patients were responders to volume expansion (i.e. a ≥ 10% stroke volume index increase). The cIVC was calculated during non-standardized (cIVC-ns) and standardized breathing (cIVC-st) conditions. The accuracy with which both cIVC-ns and cIVC-st predicted fluid responsiveness differed significantly by measurement site (interaction p < 0.001 and < 0.0001, respectively). Measuring inferior vena cava diameters 4 cm caudal to the right atrium predicted fluid responsiveness with the best accuracy. At this site, a standardized breathing manoeuvre also significantly improved predictive power: areas under ROC curves [mean and (95% CI)] for cIVC-ns = 0.85 [0.78–0.94] versus cIVC-st = 0.98 [0.97–1.0], p < 0.001. When cIVC-ns is superior or equal to 33%, fluid responsiveness is predicted with a sensitivity of 66% and a specificity of 92%. When cIVC-st is superior or equal to 44%, fluid responsiveness is predicted with a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 98%.

Conclusion

The accuracy with which cIVC measurements predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients depends on both the measurement site of inferior vena cava diameters and the breathing regime. Measuring inferior vena cava diameters during a standardized inhalation manoeuvre at 4 cm caudal to the right atrium seems to be the method by which to obtain cIVC measurements best-able to predict patients’ response to volume expansion.

Accuracy of a multiparametric score based on pulse wave analysis for prediction of fluid responsiveness: ancillary analysis of an observational study

Purpose

The pressure recording analytical method (PRAM) monitor is a non-invasive pulse contour cardiac output (CO) device that cannot be considered interchangeable with the gold standard for CO estimation. It, however, generates additional hemodynamic indices that need to be evaluated. Our objective was to investigate the performance of a multiparametric predictive score based on a combination of several parameters generated by the PRAM monitor to predict fluid responsiveness.

Methods

Secondary analysis of a prospective observational study from April 2016 to December 2017 in two French teaching hospitals. We included critically ill patients who were monitored by esophageal Doppler monitoring and an invasive arterial line, and received a 250–500 mL crystalloid fluid challenge. The main outcome measure was the predictive score discrimination evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve.

Results

The three baseline PRAM-derived parameters associated with fluid responsiveness in univariate analysis were pulse pressure variation, cardiac cycle efficiency, and arterial elastance (P < 0.01, P = 0.03, and P < 0.01, respectively). The median [interquartile range] predictive score, calculated after discretization of these parameters according to their optimal threshold value was 3 [2–3] in fluid responders and 1 [1–2] in fluid non-responders, respectively (P < 0.001). The area under the curve of the predictive score was 0.807 (95% confidence interval, 0.662 to 0.909; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

A multiparametric score combining three parameters generated by the PRAM monitor can predict fluid responsiveness with good positive and negative predictive values in intensive care unit patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12630-020-01736-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Systematic assessment of fluid responsiveness during early septic shock resuscitation: secondary analysis of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial

BACKGROUND

Fluid boluses are administered to septic shock patients with the purpose of increasing cardiac output as a means to restore tissue perfusion. Unfortunately, fluid therapy has a narrow therapeutic index, and therefore, several approaches to increase safety have been proposed. Fluid responsiveness (FR) assessment might predict which patients will effectively increase cardiac output after a fluid bolus (FR+), thus preventing potentially harmful fluid administration in non-fluid responsive (FR-) patients. However, there are scarce data on the impact of assessing FR on major outcomes. The recent ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial included systematic per-protocol assessment of FR. We performed a post hoc analysis of the study dataset with the aim of exploring the relationship between FR status at baseline, attainment of specific targets, and clinically relevant outcomes.

METHODS

ANDROMEDA-SHOCK compared the effect of peripheral perfusion- vs. lactate-targeted resuscitation on 28-day mortality. FR was assessed before each fluid bolus and periodically thereafter. FR+ and FR- subgroups, independent of the original randomization, were compared for fluid administration, achievement of resuscitation targets, vasoactive agents use, and major outcomes such as organ dysfunction and support, length of stay, and 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

FR could be determined in 348 patients at baseline. Two hundred and forty-two patients (70%) were categorized as fluid responders. Both groups achieved comparable successful resuscitation targets, although non-fluid responders received less resuscitation fluids (0 [0-500] vs. 1500 [1000-2500] mL; p 0.0001), exhibited less positive fluid balances, but received more vasopressor testing. No difference in clinically relevant outcomes between FR+ and FR- patients was found, including 24-h SOFA score (9 [5-12] vs. 8 [5-11], p = 0.4), need for MV (78% vs. 72%, p = 0.16), need for RRT (18% vs. 21%, p = 0.7), ICU-LOS (6 [3-11] vs. 6 [3-16] days, p = 0.2), and 28-day mortality (40% vs. 36%, p = 0.5). Only thirteen patients remained fluid responsive along the intervention period.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic assessment allowed determination of fluid responsiveness status in more than 80% of patients with early septic shock. Fluid boluses could be stopped in non-fluid responsive patients without any negative impact on clinical relevant outcomes. Our results suggest that fluid resuscitation might be safely guided by FR assessment in septic shock patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03078712. Registered retrospectively on March 13, 2017.

Arterial Pulse Pressure Variation with Mechanical Ventilation

Fluid administration leads to a significant increase in cardiac output in only half of ICU patients. This has led to the concept of assessing fluid responsiveness before infusing fluid. Pulse pressure variation (PPV), which quantifies the changes in arterial pulse pressure during mechanical ventilation, is one of the dynamic variables that can predict fluid responsiveness. The underlying hypothesis is that large respiratory changes in left ventricular stroke volume, and thus pulse pressure, occur in cases of biventricular preload responsiveness. Several studies showed that PPV accurately predicts fluid responsiveness when patients are under controlled mechanical ventilation. Nevertheless, in many conditions encountered in the ICU, the interpretation of PPV is unreliable (spontaneous breathing, cardiac arrhythmias) or doubtful (low Vt). To overcome some of these limitations, researchers have proposed using simple tests such as the Vt challenge to evaluate the dynamic response of PPV. The applicability of PPV is higher in the operating room setting, where fluid strategies made on the basis of PPV improve postoperative outcomes. In medical critically ill patients, although no randomized controlled trial has compared PPV-based fluid management with standard care, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend using fluid responsiveness indices, including PPV, whenever applicable. In conclusion, PPV is useful for managing fluid therapy under specific conditions where it is reliable. The kinetics of PPV during diagnostic or therapeutic tests is also helpful for fluid management.

Passive Leg Raise: Feasibility and Safety of the Maneuver in Patients With Undifferentiated Shock

Purpose:

Passive leg raise (PLR), in combination with technologies capable of capturing stroke volume changes, has been widely adopted in the management of shock. However, dedicated evaluation of safety, feasibility, and receptiveness of patients and nursing staff to PLR maneuver is missing.

Methods:

A noninterventional, prospective trial recruited adult patients with onset of undifferentiated shock within 24 hours with persistent vasopressor requirements despite fluid resuscitation. A standardized PLR maneuver was used to compare two noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring systems, each without significant impact on the performance of the maneuver. Safety and efficacy of the PLR were evaluated via subjective and objective measures. Objective measures of patient comfort and tolerance were evaluated through changes in vital signs, sedation, and analgesia requirements. Nurses and awake patients completed surveys on their experience.

Results:

Seventy-nine patients were enrolled. Testing was aborted in 2 cases for medical reasons (one patient developed rapid atrial fibrillation, second had profound desaturation). Of all, 5.4% of patients required additional vasopressor support after completion of the PLR maneuver due to persistent hypotension and 4.1% of patients required additional sedation. Among awake patients (N = 35), 6% reported pain and 29% reported discomfort. A total of 11% of nurses reported minor technical difficulties with the maneuver.

Conclusion:

Passive leg raise maneuver leads to a few serious but reversible complications in a selected population of hemodynamically unstable patients. Although it provides relevant diagnostic information, it may impact patient care. Treating physician should be aware of infrequent but possible complications and appreciate the impact of the maneuver on patients’ comfort and nursing workload.

Prediction of fluid responsiveness in ventilated patients

Fluid administration is the first-line therapy in patients with acute circulatory failure. The main goal of fluid administration is to increase the cardiac output and ultimately the oxygen delivery. Nevertheless, the decision to administer fluids or not should be carefully considered, since half of critically ill patients are fluid unresponsive, and the deleterious effects of fluid overload clearly documented. Thus, except at the initial phase of hypovolemic or septic shock, where hypovolemia is constant and most of the patients responsive to the initial fluid resuscitation, it is of importance to test fluid responsiveness before administering fluids in critically ill patients. The static markers of cardiac preload cannot reliably predict fluid responsiveness, although they have been used for decades. To address this issue, some dynamic tests have been developed over the past years. All these tests consist in measuring the changes in cardiac output in response to the transient changes in cardiac preload that they induced. Most of these tests are based on the heart-lung interactions. The pulse pressure or stroke volume respiratory variations were first described, following by the respiratory variations of the vena cava diameter or of the internal jugular vein diameter. Nevertheless, all these tests are reliable only under strict conditions limiting their use in many clinical situations. Other tests such as passive leg raising or end-expiratory occlusion act as an internal volume challenge. To reliably predict fluid responsiveness, physicians must choose among these different dynamic tests, depending on their respective limitations and on the cardiac output monitoring technique which is used. In this review, we will summarize the most recent findings regarding the prediction of fluid responsiveness in ventilated patients.

Respiratory changes of the inferior vena cava diameter predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with cardiac arrhythmias

Background

Whether the respiratory changes of the inferior vena cava diameter during a deep standardized inspiration can reliably predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with cardiac arrhythmia is unknown.

Methods

This prospective two-center study included nonventilated arrhythmic patients with infection-induced acute circulatory failure. Hemodynamic status was assessed at baseline and after a volume expansion of 500 mL 4% gelatin. The inferior vena cava diameters were measured with transthoracic echocardiography using the bi-dimensional mode on a subcostal long-axis view. Standardized respiratory cycles consisted of a deep inspiration with concomitant control of buccal pressures and passive exhalation. The collapsibility index of the inferior vena cava was calculated as [(expiratory–inspiratory)/expiratory] diameters.

Results

Among the 55 patients included in the study, 29 (53%) were responders to volume expansion. The areas under the ROC curve for the collapsibility index and inspiratory diameter of the inferior vena cava were both of 0.93 [95% CI 0.86; 1]. A collapsibility index ≥ 39% predicted fluid responsiveness with a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 88%. An inspiratory diameter < 11 mm predicted fluid responsiveness with a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 88%. A correlation between the inspiratory effort and the inferior vena cava collapsibility was found in responders but was absent in nonresponder patients.

Conclusions

In spontaneously breathing patients with cardiac arrhythmias, the collapsibility index and inspiratory diameter of the inferior vena cava assessed during a deep inspiration may be noninvasive bedside tools to predict fluid responsiveness in acute circulatory failure related to infection. These results, obtained in a small and selected population, need to be confirmed in a larger-scale study before considering any clinical application.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-018-0427-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cyclic Nonrespiratory Pulse Pressure Oscillations Caused by Atrioventricular Dissociation

Dynamic preload assessment tests, especially pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume variation (SVV), are increasingly acknowledged in mechanically ventilated patients as being predictors of fluid responsiveness. However, the limitations of this method are often neglected or overlooked. One of the prerequisites for PPV and SVV evaluation, in addition to intermittent positive pressure ventilation, is a “regular heart rhythm,” which may be an ambiguous term. We present a case where, despite a regular (paced) rhythm, atrioventricular dissociation was present and resulted in marked PPV elevation, which subsequently disappeared once sinus rhythm returned. Our case indicates that PPV and SVV should be interpreted with caution when atrioventricular dissociation is present.

Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update

In patients with acute circulatory failure, the decision to give fluids or not should not be taken lightly. The risk of overzealous fluid administration has been clearly established. Moreover, volume expansion does not always increase cardiac output as one expects. Thus, after the very initial phase and/or if fluid losses are not obvious, predicting fluid responsiveness should be the first step of fluid strategy. For this purpose, the central venous pressure as well as other “static” markers of preload has been used for decades, but they are not reliable. Robust evidence suggests that this traditional use should be abandoned. Over the last 15 years, a number of dynamic tests have been developed. These tests are based on the principle of inducing short-term changes in cardiac preload, using heart–lung interactions, the passive leg raise or by the infusion of small volumes of fluid, and to observe the resulting effect on cardiac output. Pulse pressure and stroke volume variations were first developed, but they are reliable only under strict conditions. The variations in vena caval diameters share many limitations of pulse pressure variations. The passive leg-raising test is now supported by solid evidence and is more frequently used. More recently, the end-expiratory occlusion test has been described, which is easily performed in ventilated patients. Unlike the traditional fluid challenge, these dynamic tests do not lead to fluid overload. The dynamic tests are complementary, and clinicians should choose between them based on the status of the patient and the cardiac output monitoring technique. Several methods and tests are currently available to identify preload responsiveness. All have some limitations, but they are frequently complementary. Along with elements indicating the risk of fluid administration, they should help clinicians to take the decision to administer fluids or not in a reasoned way.

Practice of hemodynamic monitoring and management in German, Austrian, and Swiss intensive care units: the multicenter cross-sectional ICU-CardioMan Study

BACKGROUND

Hemodynamic instability is frequent and outcome-relevant in critical illness. The understanding of complex hemodynamic disturbances and their monitoring and management plays an important role in treatment of intensive care patients. An increasing number of treatment recommendations and guidelines in intensive care medicine emphasize hemodynamic goals, which go beyond the measurement of blood pressures. Yet, it is not known to which extent the infrastructural prerequisites for extended hemodynamic monitoring are given in intensive care units (ICUs) and how hemodynamic management is performed in clinical practice. Further, it is still unclear which factors trigger the use of extended hemodynamic monitoring.

METHODS

In this multicenter, 1-day (November 7, 2013, and the preceding 24 h) cross-sectional study, we retrieved data on patient monitoring from ICUs in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland by means of a web-based case report form. One hundred and sixty-one intensive care units contributed detailed information on availability of hemodynamic monitoring. In addition, detailed information on hemodynamic monitoring of 1789 patients that were treated on due date was collected, and independent factors triggering the use of extended hemodynamic monitoring were identified by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Besides basic monitoring with electrocardiography (ECG), pulse oximetry, and blood pressure monitoring, the majority of patients received invasive arterial (77.9 %) and central venous catheterization (55.2 %). All over, additional extended hemodynamic monitoring for assessment of cardiac output was only performed in 12.3 % of patients, while echocardiographic examination was used in only 1.9 %. The strongest independent predictors for the use of extended hemodynamic monitoring of any kind were mechanical ventilation, the need for catecholamine therapy, and treatment backed by protocols. In 71.6 % of patients in whom extended hemodynamic monitoring was added during the study period, this extension led to changes in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended hemodynamic monitoring, which goes beyond the measurement of blood pressures, to date plays a minor role in the surveillance of critically ill patients in German, Austrian, and Swiss ICUs. This includes also consensus-based recommended diagnostic and monitoring applications, such as echocardiography and cardiac output monitoring. Mechanical ventilation, the use of catecholamines, and treatment backed by protocol could be identified as factors independently associated with higher use of extended hemodynamic monitoring.