Prediction of fluid responsiveness by FloTrac™ and PiCCOplus™ in cardiac surgery patients
- 1.2k Downloads
Keywords
Stroke Volume Lower Threshold Body Position Ethic Committee Approval Fluid ResponsivenessIntroduction
The aim of this study was to compare the prediction of fluid responsiveness [1] using the stroke volume variation (SVV) determined by FloTrac™ (SVV-FloTrac; Edwards Lifesciences, USA) and PiCCOplus™ (SVV-PiCCO; Pulsion Medical Systems, Germany).
Methods
With ethics committee approval, the SVV-FloTrac, SVV-PiCCO, pulse pressure variation (PPV), global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) and stroke volume (SV) were measured before and after a volume shift induced by body positioning (30° head-up to 30° head-down) in 40 patients after cardiac surgery. A t test, Bland–Altman analysis, Pearson correlation and area under the receiver operating curves (AUC) were calculated. P < 0.05 was considered significant.
Results
AUC predicting ΔSV > 25% and Pearson correlation of baseline indices versus ΔSV
AUC | P value | r2 value | P value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
SVV-FloTrac | 0.824 | 0.001 | 0.426 | <0.001 |
SVV-PiCCO | 0.858 | <0.001 | 0.492 | <0.001 |
PPV | 0.718 | 0.011 | 0.334 | <0.001 |
GEDV | 0.509 | 0.924 | 0.091 | 0.580 |
Conclusion
SVV-FloTrac and SVV-PiCCO showed a comparable performance in predicting fluid responsiveness. When compared with SVV-PiCCO, a lower threshold value for SVV-FloTrac has to be considered.
References
- 1.Hofer CK, et al.: Chest. 2005, 128: 848-854. 10.1378/chest.128.2.848PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd.