Advertisement

Journal of Anesthesia

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 40–46 | Cite as

The comparison between stroke volume variation and filling pressure as an estimate of right ventricular preload in patients undergoing renal transplantation

  • Daisuke Toyoda
  • Mitsue Fukuda
  • Ririko Iwasaki
  • Takashi Terada
  • Nobukazu Sato
  • Ryoichi Ochiai
  • Yoshifumi Kotake
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this prospective, observational study was to respiratory variation of stroke volume (stroke volume variation, SVV) against central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary artery diastolic pressure (PADP) as an estimate of right and left ventricular preload.

Methods

With IRB approval and informed consent, 31 patients undergoing living related renal transplantation were analyzed. Under general anesthesia with positive pressure ventilation, stroke volume index and SVV were continuously monitored with FloTrac/Vigileo monitor. Right ventricular end-diastolic volume index (RVEDVI) as well as CVP and PADP were continuously monitored with volumetric pulmonary artery catheter. Data of every 30 min interval were used for analysis. The relationship between RVEDVI and CVP, PADP, SVV was analyzed with non-linear regression and the goodness-of-fit was assessed with coefficient of determination (R 2) of each regression curve. The ability of CVP, PADP and SVV to correctly differentiate RVEDVI <100, <120 or >138 ml/m2, which were used to guide fluid administration, was also assessed with ROC analysis.

Results

Three hundred forty-eight data sets were obtained and analyzed. The goodness of fit between RVEDVI and SVV (R 2 = 0.48) was better than that between RVEDVI and CVP or PADP (R 2 = 0.19 and 0.33, respectively). The area under the ROC curve of SVV was significantly high compared to CVP or PADP.

Conclusions

This study confirmed the theoretical framework of right ventricular preload and ventricular filling pressure and respiratory variation of stroke volume. The result also suggests that SVV can correctly predict preload status compared to pressure-based indices.

Keywords

Preload responsiveness Dynamic parameter Static parameter Right ventricular end-diastolic volume Renal transplantation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 24592361.

Conflict of interest

Dr. Kotake has received consultant fee from Edwards Lifesciences and unrestricted research fund from MSD, Nihon Koden Corp. Dr. Kotake has also received speakers fee from MSD, Fresenius-Kabi, Otsuka Pharmaceuticals and Covidien.

References

  1. 1.
    Michard F, Teboul JL. Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients: a critical analysis of the evidence. Chest. 2002;121:2000–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Osman D, Ridel C, Ray P, Monnet X, Anguel N, Richard C, Teboul JL. Cardiac filling pressures are not appropriate to predict hemodynamic response to volume challenge. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:64–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biais M, Nouette-Gaulain K, Cottenceau V, Revel P, Sztark F. Uncalibrated pulse contour-derived stroke volume variation predicts fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients undergoing liver transplantation. Br J Anaesth. 2008;101:761–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cannesson M, Musard H, Desebbe O, Boucau C, Simon R, Henaine R, Lehot JJ. The ability of stroke volume variations obtained with Vigileo/FloTrac system to monitor fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients. Anesth Analg. 2009;108:513–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Forget P, Lois F, de Kock M. Goal-directed fluid management based on the pulse oximeter-derived pleth variability index reduces lactate levels and improves fluid management. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:910–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Biancofiore G, Critchley LA, Lee A, Yang XX, Bindi LM, Esposito M, Bisa M, Meacci L, Mozzo R, Filipponi F. Evaluation of a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo (version 3.02) and a comparison with previous data in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver transplant surgery. Anesth Analg. 2011;113:515–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tsai YF, Su BC, Lin CC, Liu FC, Lee WC, Yu HP. Cardiac output derived from arterial pressure waveform analysis: validation of the third-generation software in patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. Transpl Proc. 2012;44:433–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hein M, Roehl AB, Baumert JH, Rossaint R, Steendijk P. Continuous right ventricular volumetry by fast-response thermodilution during right ventricular ischemia: head-to-head comparison with conductance catheter measurements. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:2962–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sprung J, Kapural L, Bourke DL, O’Hara JF Jr. Anesthesia for kidney transplant surgery. Anesthesiol Clin North Am. 2000;18:919–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    He Z, Qiao H, Zhou W, Wang Y, Xu Z, Che X, Zhang J, Liang W. Assessment of cardiac preload status by pulse pressure variation in patients after anesthesia induction: comparison with central venous pressure and initial distribution volume of glucose. J Anesth. 2011;25:812–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kincaid EH, Meredith JW, Chang MC. Determining optimal cardiac preload during resuscitation using measurements of ventricular compliance. J Trauma. 2001;50:665–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diebel LN, Wilson RF, Tagett MG, Kline RA. End-diastolic volume. A better indicator of preload in the critically ill. Arch Surg. 1992;127:817–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chang MC, Meredith JW. Cardiac preload, splanchnic perfusion, and their relationship during resuscitation in trauma patients. J Trauma. 1997;42:577–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller PR, Meredith JW, Chang MC. Randomized, prospective comparison of increased preload versus inotropes in the resuscitation of trauma patients: effects on cardiopulmonary function and visceral perfusion. J Trauma. 1998;44:107–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Akobeng AK. Understanding diagnostic tests 3: receiver operating characteristic curves. Acta Paediatr. 2007;96:644–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reuter DA, Goetz AE. Differentiating “volumetric preload monitoring” and assessing “fluid responsiveness”. Anesth Analg. 2006;102:651–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar A, Anel R, Bunnell E, Habet K, Zanotti S, Marshall S, Neumann A, Ali A, Cheang M, Kavinsky C, Parrillo JE. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest. 2008;134:172–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang Z, Lu B, Sheng X, Jin N. Accuracy of stroke volume variation in predicting fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Anesth. 2011;25:904–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Michard F. Stroke volume variation: from applied physiology to improved outcomes. Crit Care Med. 2011;39:402–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Biais M, Ouattara A, Janvier G, Sztark F. Case scenario: respiratory variations in arterial pressure for guiding fluid management in mechanically ventilated patients. Anesthesiology. 2012;116:1354–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spahn DR, Chassot PG. CON: fluid restriction for cardiac patients during major noncardiac surgery should be replaced by goal-directed intravascular fluid administration. Anesth Analg. 2006;102:344–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Su BC, Tsai YF, Cheng CW, Yu HP, Yang MW, Lee WC, Lin CC. Stroke volume variation derived by arterial pulse contour analysis is a good indicator for preload estimation during liver transplantation. Transpl Proc. 2012;44:429–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Spohr F, Hettrich P, Bauer H, Haas U, Martin E, Bottiger BW. Comparison of two methods for enhanced continuous circulatory monitoring in patients with septic shock. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:1805–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Michard F. Changes in arterial pressure during mechanical ventilation. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:419–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taguchi H, Ichinose K, Tanimoto H, Sugita M, Tashiro M, Yamamoto T. Stroke volume variation obtained with Vigileo/FloTrac system during bleeding and fluid overload in dogs. J Anesth. 2011;25:563–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ytrebo LM. Stop filling patients against central venous pressure, please! Crit Care Med. 2011;39:396–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wagner JG, Leatherman JW. Right ventricular end-diastolic volume as a predictor of the hemodynamic response to a fluid challenge. Chest. 1998;113:1048–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zink W, Noll J, Rauch H, Bauer H, Desimone R, Martin E, Bottiger BW. Continuous assessment of right ventricular ejection fraction: new pulmonary artery catheter versus transoesophageal echocardiography. Anaesthesia. 2004;59:1126–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    De Simone R, Wolf I, Mottl-Link S, Bottiger BW, Rauch H, Meinzer HP, Hagl S. Intraoperative assessment of right ventricular volume and function. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005;27:988–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Arinc H, Gunduz H, Tamer A, Ozhan H, Akdemir R, Saglam H, Oguzhan A, Uyan C. Use of tissue Doppler to assess right ventricle function in hemodialysis patients. Am J Nephrol. 2005;25:256–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Paneni F, Gregori M, Ciavarella GM, Sciarretta S, De Biase L, Marino L, Tocci G, Principe F, Domenici A, Luciani R, Punzo G, Mene P, Volpe M. Right ventricular dysfunction in patients with end-stage renal disease. Am J Nephrol. 2010;32:432–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daisuke Toyoda
    • 1
  • Mitsue Fukuda
    • 2
  • Ririko Iwasaki
    • 2
  • Takashi Terada
    • 2
  • Nobukazu Sato
    • 2
  • Ryoichi Ochiai
    • 2
  • Yoshifumi Kotake
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnesthesiologyToho University Ohashi Medical CenterTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of AnesthesiologyToho University Omori Medical CenterTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations