Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Respiratory variation in peak aortic velocity accurately predicts fluid responsiveness in children undergoing neurosurgery under general anesthesia

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The determination of fluid responsiveness in the critically ill child is of vital importance, more so as fluid overload becomes increasingly associated with worse outcomes. Dynamic markers of volume responsiveness have shown some promise in the pediatric population, but more research is needed before they can be adopted for widespread use. Our aim was to investigate effectiveness of respiratory variation in peak aortic velocity and pulse pressure variation to predict fluid responsiveness, and determine their optimal cutoff values. We performed a prospective, observational study at a single tertiary care pediatric center. Twenty-one children with normal cardiorespiratory status undergoing general anesthesia for neurosurgery were enrolled. Respiratory variation in peak aortic velocity (ΔVpeak ao) was measured both before and after volume expansion using a bedside ultrasound device. Pulse pressure variation (PPV) value was obtained from the bedside monitor. All patients received a 10 ml/kg fluid bolus as volume expansion, and were qualified as responders if stroke volume increased >15% as a result. Utility of ΔVpeak ao and PPV and to predict responsiveness to volume expansion was investigated. A baseline ΔVpeak ao value of greater than or equal to 12.3% best predicted a positive response to volume expansion, with a sensitivity of 77%, specificity of 89% and area under receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. PPV failed to demonstrate utility in this patient population. Respiratory variation in peak aortic velocity is a promising marker for optimization of perioperative fluid therapy in the pediatric population and can be accurately measured using bedside ultrasonography. More research is needed to evaluate the lack of effectiveness of pulse pressure variation for this purpose.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Michard F, Boussat S, Chemla D, et al. Realationship between respiratory changes in arterial pulse pressure and fluid responsiveness in septic patients with acute circulatory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;162:134–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kumar A, Anel R, Bunnell E, 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;32:691–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Osman D, Ridel C, Ray P, et al. Cardiac filling pressures are not appropriate to predict hemodynamic response to volume challenge. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:64–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Monnet X, Dres M, Ferre´ A, et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness by a continuous noninvasive assessment of arterial pressure in critically ill patients: comparison with four other dynamic indices. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109:330–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Michard F, Teboul JL. Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients. A critical analysis of the evidence. Chest. 2002;121:2000–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 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;37:2642–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Perel A, Pizov R, Cotev S. Respiratory variations in the arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation reflect volume status and fluid responsiveness. Intensive Care Med. 2014;40:798–807.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Aboy M, McNames J, Thong T, et al. A novel algorithm to estimate the pulse pressure variation index delta PP. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2004;51:2198–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cannesson M, Slieker J, Desebe O, et al. The ability of a novel algorithm for automatic estimation of the respiratory variations in arterial pulse pressure to monitor fluid responsiveness in the operating room. Anesth Analg. 2008;106:1195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mahjoub Y, Lorne E, Micaux Y, et al. Accuracy of automated continuous calculation of pulse pressure variation in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37:360–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Durand P, Chevret L, Essouri S, Haas V, Devictor D. Respiratory variations in aortic blood flow predict fluid responsiveness in ventilated children. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34:888–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. DeBacker D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, Koch M, Vincent JL. Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness; influence of tidal volume. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31:517–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Choi D, Kwak H, Park H, Kim Y, Choi C, Lee J. Respiratory variation in aortic blood flow velocity as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in children after repair of ventricular septal defect. Pediatr Cardiol. 2010;31:1166–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Renner J, Gruenewald M, Meybohm P, et. al. Effect of elevated PEEP on dynamic variables of fluid responsiveness in a pediatric animal model. Pediatr Anesth. 2008;18:1170–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Desgranges F-P, Desebbe O, Pereira de Souza Neto E, et al. Respiratory variation in aortic blood flow velocity to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pediatr Anesth. 2016;26:37–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cecconi M, Corredor C, Arulkumaran N, et al. Clinical review: goal-directed therapy—what is the evidence in surgical patients? The effect on different risk groups. Crit Care. 2013;17:209.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Gan H, Cannesson M, Chandler J, Anserimo J. Predicting fluid responsiveness in children: a systematic review. Anesth Analg. 2013;117:1380–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sproul A, Simpson E. Stroke volume and related hemodynamic data in normal children. Paediatrics. 1964;33:912–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bilchick K, Wise R. Paradoxical physical findings described by Kussmaul: pulsus paradoxus and Kussmaul’s sign. Lancet. 2002;359:1940–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Perel A, Pizov R, Cotev S. Systolic blood pressure variation is a sensitive indicator of hypovolemia in ventilated dogs subjected to graded hemorrhage. Anesthesiology. 1987;67:498–502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cannesson M, Aboy M, Hofer C, Rehman M. Pulse pressure variation: where are we today? J Clin Monit Comput. 2011;25:45–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marik P, 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;37:2642–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pereira de Souza Neto E, Grousson S, Duflo F, et al. Predicting fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children under general anaesthesia using dynamic parameters and transthoracic echocardiography. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106:856–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Byon H, Lim C, Lee J, et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children undergoing neurosurgery. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110:586–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Senzaki H, Akagi M, Hishi T, et al. Age-associated changes in arterial elastic properties in children. Eur J Pediatr. 2002;161:547–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study received no funding from any source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kavita G. Morparia.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from parents of all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Morparia, K.G., Reddy, S.K., Olivieri, L.J. et al. Respiratory variation in peak aortic velocity accurately predicts fluid responsiveness in children undergoing neurosurgery under general anesthesia. J Clin Monit Comput 32, 221–226 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-017-0013-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-017-0013-3

Keywords

Navigation