Article

The Ability of Pulse Pressure Variations Obtained with CNAP (TM) Device to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in the Operating Room

Service d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation 1, Hôpital Pellegrin, CHU Bordeaux, 33076 Bordeaux Cedex, France.
Anesthesia and analgesia (Impact Factor: 3.42). 06/2011; 113(3):523-8. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182240054
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Respiratory-induced pulse pressure variations obtained with an arterial line (ΔPP(ART)) indicate fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients. The Infinity® CNAP™ SmartPod® (Dräger Medical AG & Co. KG, Lübeck, Germany) provides noninvasive continuous beat-to-beat arterial blood pressure measurements and a near real-time pressure waveform. We hypothesized that respiratory-induced pulse pressure variations obtained with the CNAP system (ΔPP(CNAP)) predict fluid responsiveness as well as ΔPP(ART) predicts fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients during general anesthesia.
Thirty-five patients undergoing vascular surgery were studied after induction of general anesthesia. Stroke volume (SV) measured with the Vigileo™/FloTrac™ (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA), ΔPP(ART), and ΔPP(CNAP) were recorded before and after intravascular volume expansion (VE) (500 mL of 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4). Subjects were defined as responders if SV increased by ≥15% after VE.
Twenty patients responded to VE and 15 did not. The correlation coefficient between ΔPP(ART) and ΔPP(CNAP) before VE was r = 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.84-0.96; P < 0.0001). Before VE, ΔPP(ART) and ΔPP(CNAP) were significantly higher in responders than in nonresponders (P < 0.0001). The values of ΔPP(ART) and ΔPP(CNAP) before VE were significantly correlated with the percent increase in SV induced by VE (respectively, r(2) = 0.50; P < 0.0001 and r(2) = 0.57; P < 0.0001). Before VE, a ΔPP(ART) >10% discriminated between responders and nonresponders with a sensitivity of 90% (95% CI = 69%-99%) and a specificity of 87% (95% CI = 60%-98%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.957 ± 0.035 for ΔPP(ART). Before VE, a ΔPP(CNAP) >11% discriminated between responders and nonresponders with a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI = 62%-97%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI = 78%-100%). The area under the ROC curve was 0.942 ± 0.040 for ΔPP(CNAP). There was no significant difference between the area under the ROC curve for ΔPP(ART) and ΔPP(CNAP).
A value of ΔPP(CNAP) >11% has a sensitivity of at least 62% in predicting preload-dependent responders to VE in mechanically ventilated patients during general anesthesia.

1 Follower
 · 
291 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: La perspective d’une utilisation mieux validée des techniques non invasives d’analyse de l’onde de pouls pourrait offrir de multiples apports en pratique clinique. Dans ce domaine, le monitorage non invasif de la pression artérielle (PA) pourrait permettre un meilleur dépistage des variations tensionnelles rapides dans des situations d’instabilité hémodynamique où une mesure invasive est délicate ou peu habituelle à mettre en oeuvre. Le caractère continu de la mesure est également intéressant pour l’évaluation immédiate de l’efficacité d’une épreuve de remplissage. Par ailleurs, et quoique la validation reste à établir en pratique clinique, la généralisation d’une mesure non invasive continue de la variation respiratoire de la pression pulsée semble prometteuse chez les patients recevant une anesthésie générale ou une sédation en ventilation contrôlée, pour guider le remplissage vasculaire en peropératoire (chirurgie viscérale moyenne avec pertes insensibles, orthopédique, orthognatique…), mais également dans le cadre de l’optimisation hémodynamique en préhospitalier, aux urgences ou à l’entrée en réanimation. Pour les patients de réanimation, la mise en place d’un cathéter artériel radial reste la référence lorsque le contexte clinique (choc, utilisation de catécholamines) rend l’utilisation d’une mesure non invasive difficile et ininterprétable.
    Réanimation 03/2012; 21(2). DOI:10.1007/s13546-012-0457-x
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: La défaillance circulatoire de l’enfant est une source de mortalité et de surmorbidité quelle que soit sa cause; elle impose une reconnaissance précoce et la mise en route sans délai d’un traitement standardisé fondé sur des objectifs prédéfinis. Les outils non invasifs de diagnostic et de monitorage du débit cardiaque sont devenus un complément essentiel à la surveillance continue de la pression artérielle sanglante, la technique oscillométrique ayant ses propres limites. L’échocardiographie transthoracique et le doppler oesophagien sont les outils les mieux évalués chez l’enfant, mais ils comportent également des limites et exigent une formation spécifique. Les paramètres statiques de précharge traditionnels (pression, volume et indices échodoppler) sont peu prédictifs de la réponse au remplissage vasculaire, ce qui justifie le recours à des index dynamiques dont certains sont validés chez l’enfant.
    Réanimation 03/2013; 22(2). DOI:10.1007/s13546-013-0656-4
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Tensys TL-200(®) noninvasive beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) monitor displays continuous radial artery waveform as well as systolic, mean and diastolic BP from a pressure sensor directly over the radial artery at the wrist. It locates the site of maximal radial pulse signal, determines mean BP from maximal pulse waveform amplitude at optimal artery compression and then derives systolic and diastolic BP. We performed a cross-sectional study of TL-200 BP comparisons with contralateral invasive radial artery (A-Line) BP values in 19 subjects during an average 2.5 h of general anesthesia for a wide range of surgical procedures. Two hundred and fifty random sample pairs/patient resulted in 4,747 systolic, mean and diastolic BP pairs for analysis. A-Line BP ranged from 29 mm Hg diastolic to 211 mm Hg systolic, and heart rate varied between 38 and 210 beats/min. Bland-Altman analysis showed an average 2.3 mm Hg TL-200 versus A-Line systolic BP bias and limits of agreement (1.96 SD) were ± 15.3 mm Hg. Mean BP showed a 2.3 mm Hg TL-200 bias and ± 11.7 mm Hg limits of agreement, while diastolic BP showed a 1.7 mm Hg bias and ± 12.3 mm Hg limits of agreement. Coefficients of determination for TL-200 and A-Line BP regression were r² = 0.86 for systolic, r² = 0.86 for mean, and r² = 80 for diastolic BP, respectively, with no apparent change in correlation at low or high BP. Bland-Altman analysis suggested satisfactory agreement between TL-200 noninvasive beat-to-beat BP and invasive A-Line BP. Paired TL-200/A-Line BP comparisons showed a high coefficient of determination.
    International Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 01/2012; 26(2):75-83. DOI:10.1007/s10877-012-9336-2 · 1.45 Impact Factor
Show more