Fluid responsiveness predicted by noninvasive Bioreactance-based passive leg raise test
- 1.3k Downloads
To study the feasibility of predicting fluid responsiveness (FR) by passive leg raising (PLR) using a Bioreactance-based noninvasive cardiac output monitoring device (NICOM).
This prospective, two-center study included 75 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) adult patients immediately after cardiac surgery. NICOM was used to continuously record cardiac output (CO) at baseline, during a PLR, and then during a 500 ml i.v. rapid colloid infusion. We estimated the precision of NICOM at baseline to derive the least minimum significant change (LMSC) in CO. We studied the predictability of PLR for FR by systematic analysis of different categorizations of PLR and FR, based on percentage change in CO (from 0 to 20%).
The LMSC was 8.85%. CO was 4.17 ± 1.04 L min−1 at baseline, 4.38 ± 1.14 L min−1 during PLR, 4.16 ± 1.08 L min−1 upon return to baseline, and 4.85 ± 1.41 L min−1 after fluid infusion. The change in CO following fluid bolus was highly correlated with the change in CO following PLR: y = 0.91x + 4.3, r = 0.77. The Pearson correlation coefficient showed that the best pair of thresholds was found for PLR ≥0% predicting FR ≥0%. Using this pair of thresholds, PLR had 88% sensitivity and 100% specificity for predicting FR. When we restricted the analysis to change in CO > LMSC, the best pair of thresholds was obtained for PLR >9% predicting FR >9%. Using this pair of thresholds, PLR sensitivity was reduced to 68% and specificity to 95%.
In this specific population of patients, it is clinically valid to use the bioreactance-based NICOM system to predict FR from changes in CO during PLR.
KeywordsCardiac output Monitoring Fluid response
The authors thank Steve Novak for his help in collecting data. Cheetah-Medical gave for free the NICOM devices and the consumable.
Conflict of interest
Pierre Squara is a consultant for Cheetah-Medical. Other authors have no conflicts of interest.
- 3.Lobo SM, Lobo FR, Polachini CA, Patini DS, Yamamoto AE, de Oliveira NE, Serrano P, Sanches HS, Spegiorin MA, Queiroz MM, Christiano AC Jr, Savieiro EF, Alvarez PA, Teixeira SP, Cunrath GS (2006) Prospective, randomized trial comparing fluids and dobutamine optimization of oxygen delivery in high-risk surgical patients. Crit Care 10:R72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Della Rocca G, Costa M (2004) Hemodynamic-volumetric monitoring. Minerva Anesthesiol 70:229–232Google Scholar
- 35.Greene A, Shoukas A (1986) Changes in canine cardiac function and venous return curves by the carotid baroreflex. Am J Physiol 25:1288–1296Google Scholar
- 40.Lakhal K, Ehrmann S, Runge I, Benzekri-Lefevre D, Legras A, Dequin P, Mercie rE, Wolff M, Regnier B, Boulain T (2010) Central venous pressure measurements improve the accuracy of leg raising-induced change in pulse pressure to predict fluid responsiveness. Intensive Care Med 36:940–948CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar