Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of ability of pulse pressure variation to predict fluid responsiveness in prone and supine position: an observational study

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

Abstract

We aimed to compare the ability of pulse pressure variation (PPV) to predict fluid responsiveness in prone and supine positions and investigate effect of body mass index (BMI), intraabdominal pressure (IAP) and static respiratory compliance (CS) on PPV. A total of 88 patients undergoing neurosurgery were included. After standardized anesthesia induction, patients’ PPV, stroke volume index (SVI), CS and IAP values were recorded in supine (T1) and prone (T2) positions and after fluid loading (T3). Also, PPV change percentage (PPVΔ%) between T2 and T1 times was calculated. Patients whose SVI increased more than 15% after the fluid loading were defined as volume responders. In 10 patients, PPVΔ% was ≤ − 20%. All of these patients had CST2 < 31 ml/cmH2O, seven had BMI > 30 kg/m2, and two had IAPT2 > 15 mmHg. In 16 patients, PPVΔ% was ≥ 20%. In these patients, 10 had CST2 < 31 ml/cmH2O, 10 had BMI > 30 kg/m2, and 12 had IAPT2 > 15 mmHg. Thirty-nine patients were volume responder. When all patients were examined for predicting fluid responsiveness, area under curves (AUC) of PPVT2 (0.790, 95%CI 0.690–0.870) was significantly lower than AUC of PPVT1 (0.937, 95%CI 0.878–0.997) with ROC analysis (p = 0.002). When patients whose CST2 was < 31 ml/cmH2O and whose BMI was > 30 kg/m2 were excluded from analysis separately, AUC of PPVT2 became similar to PPVT1. PPV in the prone can predict fluid responsiveness as good as PPV in the supine, only if BMI is < 30 kg/m2 and CS value at prone is > 31 ml/cmH2O.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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. Conway DH, Mayall R, Abdul-Latif MS, Gilligan S, Tackaberry C. Randomised controlled trial investigating the influence of intravenous fluid titration using oesophageal Doppler monitoring during bowel surgery. Anaesthesia. 2002;57:845–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Venn R, Steele A, Richardson P, Poloniecki J, Grounds M, Newman P. Randomized controlled trial to investigate influence of the fluid challenge on duration of hospital stay and perioperative morbidity in patients with hip fractures. Br J Anaesth. 2002;88:65–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gan TJ, Soppitt A, Maroof M, et al. Goal-directed intraoperative fluid administration reduces length of hospital stay after major surgery. Anesthesiology. 2002;97:820–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Derichard A, Robin E, Tavernier B, et al. Automated pulse pressure and stroke volume variations from radial artery: evaluation during major abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2009;103:678–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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 off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Chest. 2005;128:848–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Michard F. Changes in arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:419–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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;104:407–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dharmavaram S, Jellish WS, Nockels RP, et al. Effect of prone positioning systems on hemodynamic and cardiac function during lumbar spine surgery: an echocardiographic study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31:1388–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Yang SY, Shim JK, Song Y, Seo SJ, Kwak YL. Validation of pulse pressure variation and corrected flow time as predictors of fluid responsiveness in patients in the prone position. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110:713–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Robinson JD, Lupkiewicz SM, Palenik L, Lopez LM, Ariet M. Determination of ideal body weight for drug dosage calculations. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1983;40:1016–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kron IL, Harman PK, Nolan SP. The measurement of intraabdominal pressure as a criterion of abdominal re-exploration. Ann Surg. 1984;199:28–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Yokoyama M, Ueda W, Hirakawa M, Yamamoto H. Hemodynamic effect of the prone position during anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1991;35:741–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Marks R, Silverman R, Fernandez R, Candiotti KA, Fu E. Does the systolic pressure variation change in the prone position? J Clin Monit Comput. 2009;23:279–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Takata M, Wise RA, Robotham JL. Effects of abdominal pressure on venous return: abdominal vascular zone conditions. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1990;69:1961–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kitano Y, Takata M, Sasaki N, Zhang Q, Yamamoto S, Miyasaka K. Influence of increased abdominal pressure on steady-state cardiac performance. J Appl Physiol. 1999;86:1651–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Renner J, Gruenewald M, Quaden R, et al. Influence of increased intra-abdominal pressure on fluid responsiveness predicted by pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation in a porcine model. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:650–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Palmon SC, Kirsch JR, Depper JA, Toung TJ. The effect of the prone position on pulmonary mechanics is frame-dependent. Anesth Analg. 1998;87:1175–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chiumello D, Cressoni M, Racagni M, Landi L, Li Bassi G, Polli F, Carlesso E, Gattinoni L. Effects of thoraco-pelvic supports during prone position in patients with acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome: a physiological study. Crit Care. 2006;10:R87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Tournadre JP, Allaouchiche B, Cayrel V, Mathon L, Chassard D. Estimation of cardiac preload changes by systolic pressure variation in pigs undergoing pneumoperitoneum. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2000;44:231–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Magder S. Clinical usefulness of respiratory variations in arterial pressure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004;169:151–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Teboul JL, Pinsky MR, Mercat A, et al. Estimating cardiac filling pressure in mechanically ventilated patients with hyperinflation. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:3631–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jardin F, Genevray B, Brun-Ney D, Bourdarias JP. Influence of lung and chest wall compliances on transmission of airway pressure to the pleural space in critically ill patients. Chest. 1985;88:653–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Monnet X, Bleibtreu A, Ferré A, et al. Passive leg-raising and end-expiratory occlusion tests perform better than pulse pressure variation in patients with low respiratory system compliance. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:152–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Assistance with the study: We would like to thank Turkish Neurosurgical Society for its assistance with the study.

Funding

Support was provided solely from institutional and/or departmental sources.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, İ.Ü. İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Anesteziyoloji ABD. Turgut Ozal cad. Fatih, Istanbul, Turkey

    Achmet Ali, Taner Abdullah, Lerzan Dogan, Mukadder Orhan-Sungur & Ibrahim Ozkan Akinci

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Pulat Akin Sabanci

Authors
  1. Achmet Ali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Taner Abdullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pulat Akin Sabanci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lerzan Dogan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mukadder Orhan-Sungur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ibrahim Ozkan Akinci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Achmet Ali.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

10877_2018_195_MOESM1_ESM.tif

Online resource 1: Individual values of PPV in responders and non-responders patients in the supine and in the prone position. Dashed lines present cut-off points—Supplementary material 1 (TIF 17861 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ali, A., Abdullah, T., Sabanci, P.A. et al. Comparison of ability of pulse pressure variation to predict fluid responsiveness in prone and supine position: an observational study. J Clin Monit Comput 33, 573–580 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-018-0195-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-018-0195-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation