Prediction of fluid responsiveness using dynamic preload indices in patients undergoing robot-assisted surgery with pneumoperitoneum in the Trendelenburg position

Anaesthesia and Intensive Care

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 515-522

  Chin, J H ^a   Lee, E H ^a   Hwang, G S ^a   Hwang, J H ^a   Choi, W J ^a  

^a University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Fluid responsiveness; Pneumoperitoneum; Preload; Pulse pressure variation; Stroke volume variation; Trendelenburg

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FLUID RESPONSIVENESS; HEART STROKE VOLUME; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MEASUREMENT; PATIENT POSITIONING; PNEUMOPERITONEUM; PREDICTION; PROSTATECTOMY; PULSE PRESSURE VARIATION; REVIEW; ROBOT ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC PROSTATECTOMY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STROKE VOLUME VARIATION; TRENDELENBURG POSITION; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE; BODY POSTURE; BREATHING MECHANICS; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FLUID THERAPY; GASTROINTESTINAL RADIOGRAPHY; HEART PRELOAD; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT MONITORING; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; ROBOTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TRENDELENBURG;

FLUID RESPONSIVENESS; PNEUMOPERITONEUM; PRELOAD; PULSE PRESSURE VARIATION; STROKE VOLUME VARIATION; TRENDELENBURG;

AGED; BLOOD PRESSURE; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FLUID THERAPY; HEAD-DOWN TILT; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE; PNEUMOPERITONEUM, ARTIFICIAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTATECTOMY; RESPIRATORY MECHANICS; ROBOTICS; ROC CURVE; STROKE VOLUME; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84881245604     PISSN: 0310057X     EISSN: 14480271     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0310057x1304100413     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Kumar A, Anel R, Bunnell E, Habet K, Zanotti S, Marshall S et al. Pulmonary artery occlusion pressure and central venous pressure fail to predict ventricular filling volume, cardiac performance, or the response to volume infusion in normal subjects. Crit Care Med 2004; 32:691-699.
2. O sman D, Ridel C, Ray P, Monnet X, Anguel N, Richard C et al. Cardiac filling pressures are not appropriate to predict hemodynamic response to volume challenge. Crit Care Med 2007; 35:64-68.
3. Hofer CK, Muller SM, Furrer L, Klaghofer R, Genoni M, Zollinger A. Stroke volume and pulse pressure variation for prediction of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing offpump coronary artery bypass grafting. Chest 2005; 128:848-854.
4. Cannesson M, Musard H, Desebbe O, Boucau C, Simon R, Henaine R et al. The ability of stroke volume variations obtained with Vigileo/FloTrac system to monitor fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients. Anesth Analg 2009; 108:513-517.
5. R euter DA, Kirchner A, Felbinger TW, Weis FC, Kilger E, Lamm P et al. Usefulness of left ventricular stroke volume variation to assess fluid responsiveness in patients with reduced cardiac function. Crit Care Med 2003; 31:1399-1404.
6. R ex S, Brose S, Metzelder S, Huneke R, Schalte G, Autschbach R et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in patients during cardiac surgery. Br J Anaesth 2004; 93:782-788.
7. Biais M, Bernard O, Ha JC, Degryse C, Sztark F. Abilities of pulse pressure variations and stroke volume variations to predict fluid responsiveness in prone position during scoliosis surgery. Br J Anaesth 2010; 104:407-413.
8. Berkenstadt H, Margalit N, Hadani M, Friedman Z, Segal E, Villa Y et al. Stroke volume variation as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing brain surgery. Anesth Analg 2001; 92:984-989.
9. Michard F, Teboul JL. Using heart-lung interactions to assess fluid responsiveness during mechanical ventilation. Crit Care 2000; 4:282-289.
10. Sharma KC, Brandstetter RD, Brensilver JM, Jung LD. Cardiopulmonary physiology and pathophysiology as a consequence of laparoscopic surgery. Chest 1996; 110:810-815.
11. Bliacheriene F, Machado SB, Fonseca EB, Otsuke D, Auler JO Jr, Michard F. Pulse pressure variation as a tool to detect hypovolaemia during pneumoperitoneum. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2007; 51:1268-1272.
12. Hoiseth LO, Hoff IE, Myre K, Landsverk SA, Kirkeboen KA. Dynamic variables of fluid responsiveness during pneumoperitoneum and laparoscopic surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2012; 56:777-786.
13. Manecke GR. Edwards FloTrac sensor and Vigileo monitor: easy, accurate, reliable cardiac output assessment using the arterial pulse wave. Expert Rev Med Devices 2005; 2:523-527.
14. Manecke GR Jr, Auger WR. Cardiac output determination from the arterial pressure wave: clinical testing of a novel algorithm that does not require calibration. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2007; 21:3-7.
15. Derichard A, Robin E, Tavernier B, Costecalde M, Fleyfel M, Onimus J et al. Automated pulse pressure and stroke volume variations from radial artery: evaluation during major abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103:678-684.
16. Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med 2009; 37:2642-2647.
17. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44:837-845.
18. Lakhal K, Ehrmann S, Benzekri-Lefevre D, Runge I, Legras A, Dequin PF et al. Respiratory pulse pressure variation fails to predict fluid responsiveness in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care 2011; 15:R85.
19. Pelosi P, Quintel M, Malbrain ML. Effect of intra-abdominal pressure on respiratory mechanics. Acta Clin Belg Suppl 2007; 1:78-88.
20. Chapin JC, Downs JB, Douglas ME, Murphy EJ, Ruiz BC. Lung expansion, airway pressure transmission, and positive end-expiratory pressure. Arch Surg 1979; 114:1193-1197.
21. Malbrain ML, Wilmer A. The polycompartment syndrome: towards an understanding of the interactions between different compartments! Intensive Care Med 2007; 33:1869-1872.
22. Wauters J, Wilmer A, Valenza F. Abdomino-thoracic transmission during ACS: facts and figures. Acta Clin Belg Suppl 2007; 1:200-205.
23. Michard F. Changes in arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation. Anesthesiology 2005; 103:419-428.
24. Henny CP, Hofland J. Laparoscopic surgery: pitfalls due to anesthesia, positioning, and pneumoperitoneum. Surg Endosc 2005; 19:1163-1171.
25. Sibbald WJ, Paterson NA, Holliday RL, Baskerville J. The Trendelenburg position: hemodynamic effects in hypotensive and normotensive patients. Crit Care Med 1979; 7:218-224.
26. Greim CA, Broscheit J, Kortlander J, Roewer N, Schulte am Esch J. Effects of intra-abdominal CO2-insufflation on normal and impaired myocardial function: an experimental study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003; 47:751-760.
27. Fluss R, Faraggi D, Reiser B. Estimation of the Youden Index and its associated cutoff point. Biom J 2005; 47:458-472.
28. Perkins NJ, Schisterman EF. The inconsistency of "optimal" cutpoints obtained using two criteria based on the receiver operating characteristic curve. Am J Epidemiol 2006; 163:670-675.
29. Darmon PL, Hillel Z, Mogtader A, Mindich B, Thys D. Cardiac output by transesophageal echocardiography using continuouswave Doppler across the aortic valve. Anesthesiology 1994; 80:796-805.