Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stroke volume variation and dynamic arterial elastance predict fluid responsiveness even in thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a prospective observational study

Journal of Anesthesia volume 37, pages 930–937 (2023)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

It remains unknown whether stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV), and dynamic arterial elastance (Eadyn) are suitable for monitoring fluid management during thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) in the prone position with one-lung ventilation and artificial pneumothorax. Our study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of SVV, PVV, and Eadyn in predicting the fluid responsiveness in these patients.

Methods

We recruited 24 patients who had undergone TE. Patients with a mean arterial blood pressure ≤ 65 mmHg received a 200-ml bolus of 6% hydroxyethyl starch over 10 min. Fluid responders showed the stroke volume index ≥ 15% 5 min after the fluid bolus. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated and area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was calculated.

Results

We obtained 61 fluid bolus data points, of which 20 were responders and 41 were non-responders. The median SVV before the fluid bolus in responders was significantly higher than that in non-responders (18% [interquartile range (IQR) 13–21] vs. 12% [IQR 8–15], P = 0.001). Eadyn was significantly lower in responders than in non-responders (0.55 [IQR 0.45–0.78] vs. 0.91 [IQR 0.67–1.00], P < 0.001). There was no difference in the PPV between the groups. The AUROC was 0.76 for SVV (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62–0.89, P = 0.001), 0.56 for PPV (95% CI 0.41–0.71, P = 0.44), and 0.82 for Eadyn (95% CI 0.69–0.95, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

SVV and Eadyn are reliable parameters for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing TE.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are not openly available due to reasons of sensitivity and are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Arslantas MK, Kara HV, Tuncer BB, Yildizeli B, Yuksel M, Bostanci K, Bekiroglu N, Kararmaz A, Cinel I, Batirel HF. Effect of the amount of intraoperative fluid administration on postoperative pulmonary complications following anatomic lung resections. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:314–20, 321 e1.

  2. Sun Y, Chai F, Pan C, Romeiser JL, Gan TJ. Effect of perioperative goal-directed hemodynamic therapy on postoperative recovery following major abdominal surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care. 2017;21:141.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Brandstrup B, Tønnesen H, Beier-Holgersen R, Hjortsø E, Ørding H, Lindorff-Larsen K, Rasmussen MS, Lanng C, Wallin L, Iversen LH, Gramkow CS, Okholm M, Blemmer T, Svendsen PE, Rottensten HH, Thage B, Riis J, Jeppesen IS, Teilum D, Christensen AM, Graungaard B, Pott F, Danish Study Group on Perioperative Fluid Therapy. Effects of intravenous fluid restriction on postoperative complications: comparison of two perioperative fluid regimens: a randomized assessor-blinded multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 2003;238:641–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Han IW, Kim H, Heo J, Oh MG, Choi YS, Lee SE, Lim CS. Excess intraoperative fluid volume administration is associated with pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective multicenter study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96: e6893.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Eng OS, Arlow RL, Moore D, Chen C, Langenfeld JE, August DA, Carpizo DR. Fluid administration and morbidity in transhiatal esophagectomy. J Surg Res. 2016;200:91–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Som A, Maitra S, Bhattacharjee S, Baidya DK. Goal directed fluid therapy decreases postoperative morbidity but not mortality in major non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Anesth. 2017;31:66–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mayer J, Boldt J, Mengistu AM, Röhm KD, Suttner S. Goal-directed intraoperative therapy based on autocalibrated arterial pressure waveform analysis reduces hospital stay in high-risk surgical patients: a randomized, controlled trial. Crit Care. 2010;14:R18.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Booka E, Takeuchi H, Nishi T, Matsuda S, Kaburagi T, Fukuda K, Nakamura R, Takahashi T, Wada N, Kawakubo H, Omori T, Kitagawa Y. The impact of postoperative complications on survivals after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94: e1369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Whooley BP, Law S, Murthy SC, Alexandrou A, Wong J. Analysis of reduced death and complication rates after esophageal resection. Ann Surg. 2001;233:338–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Petri R, Zuccolo M, Brizzolari M, Rossit L, Rosignoli A, Durastante V, Petrin G, Cecchis LD, Sorrentino M. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization for esophageal cancer with the patient in prone position. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1102–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lv L, Hu W, Ren Y, Wei X. Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Onco Targets Ther. 2016;9:6751–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Schoppmann SF, Prager G, Langer FB, Riegler FM, Kabon B, Fleischmann E, Zacherl J. Open versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single-center case controlled study. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:3044–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Daiko H, Nishimura M. A pilot study of the technical and oncologic feasibility of thoracoscopic esophagectomy with extended lymph node dissection in the prone position for clinical stage I thoracic esophageal carcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:673–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dapri G, Himpens J, Cadière GB. Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: laparoscopic transhiatal procedure or thoracoscopy in prone position followed by laparoscopy? Surg Endosc. 2008;22:1060–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yatabe T, Kitagawa H, Yamashita K, Akimori T, Hanazaki K, Yokoyama M. Better postoperative oxygenation in thoracoscopic esophagectomy in prone positioning. J Anesth. 2010;24:803–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lopes MR, Oliveira MA, Pereira VO, Lemos IP, Auler JO Jr, Michard F. Goal-directed fluid management based on pulse pressure variation monitoring during high-risk surgery: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Crit Care. 2007;11:R100.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Bundgaard-Nielsen M, Jans O, Muller RG, Korshin A, Ruhnau B, Bie P, Secher NH, Kehlet H. Does goal-directed fluid therapy affect postoperative orthostatic intolerance?: a randomized trial. Anesthesiology. 2013;119:813–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Benes J, Chytra I, Altmann P, Hluchy M, Kasal E, Svitak R, Pradl R, Stepan M. Intraoperative fluid optimization using stroke volume variation in high risk surgical patients: results of prospective randomized study. Crit Care. 2010;14:R118.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Monge Garcia MI, Gil Cano A, Gracia RM. Dynamic arterial elastance to predict arterial pressure response to volume loading in preload-dependent patients. Crit Care. 2011;15:R15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Mesquida J, Kim HK, Pinsky MR. Effect of tidal volume, intrathoracic pressure, and cardiac contractility on variations in pulse pressure, stroke volume, and intrathoracic blood volume. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37:1672–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Michard F, Chemla D, Teboul JL. Applicability of pulse pressure variation: how many shades of grey? Crit Care. 2015;19:144.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Monnet X, Shi R, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness. What’s new? Ann Intensive Care. 2022;12:46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Walsh M, Devereaux PJ, Garg AX, Kurz A, Turan A, Rodseth RN, Cywinski J, Thabane L, Sessler DI. Relationship between intraoperative mean arterial pressure and clinical outcomes after noncardiac surgery: toward an empirical definition of hypotension. Anesthesiology. 2013;119:507–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Monge Garcia MI, Romero MG, Cano AG, Aya HD, Rhodes A, Grounds RM, Cecconi M. Dynamic arterial elastance as a predictor of arterial pressure response to fluid administration: a validation study. Crit Care. 2014;18:626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cecconi M, Monge Garcia MI, Gracia Romero M, Mellinghoff J, Caliandro F, Grounds RM, Rhodes A. The use of pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation in spontaneously breathing patients to assess dynamic arterial elastance and to predict arterial pressure response to fluid administration. Anesth Analg. 2015;120:76–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fu Q, Duan M, Zhao F, Mi W. Evaluation of stroke volume variation and pulse pressure variation as predictors of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing protective one-lung ventilation. Drug Discov Ther. 2015;9:296–302.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950;3:32–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 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 

  29. Suehiro K, Okutani R. Stroke volume variation as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing one-lung ventilation. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2010;24:772–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fu Q, Zhao F, Mi W, Zhang H. Stroke volume variation fail to predict fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing pulmonary lobectomy with one-lung ventilation using thoracotomy. Biosci Trends. 2014;8:59–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cannesson M, Vallet B, Michard F. Pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation: from flying blind to flying right? Br J Anaesth. 2009;103:896–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hikasa Y, Suzuki S, Mihara Y, Tanabe S, Noma K, Shirakawa Y, Fujiwara T, Morimatsu H. Intraoperative fluid therapy and postoperative complications during minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a single-center retrospective study. J Anesth. 2020;34:404–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhou X, Pan W, Chen B, Xu Z, Pan J. Predictive performance of dynamic arterial elastance for arterial pressure response to fluid expansion in mechanically ventilated hypotensive adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Intensive Care. 2021;11:119.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Seo H, Kong YG, Jin SJ, Chin JH, Kim HY, Lee YK, Hwang JH, Kim YK. Dynamic arterial elastance in predicting arterial pressure increase after fluid challenge during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a prospective observational study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94: e1794.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the members of the Data Science Division, Center for Innovative Clinical Medicine, Okayama University Hospital for their help with data entry in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1, Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan

    Yukiko Hikasa

  2. Department of Anesthesiology and Resuscitology, Okayama University Hospital, Okayama, Japan

    Satoshi Suzuki & Hiroshi Morimatsu

  3. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery Transplant and Surgical Oncology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan

    Shunsuke Tanabe, Kazuhiro Noma & Toshiyoshi Fujiwara

  4. Department of Surgery, Hiroshima City Hiroshima Citizens Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan

    Yasuhiro Shirakawa

Authors
  1. Yukiko Hikasa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Satoshi Suzuki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shunsuke Tanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kazuhiro Noma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yasuhiro Shirakawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Toshiyoshi Fujiwara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hiroshi Morimatsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Material preparation, data analysis were performed by YH and SS. The first draft of the manuscript was written by YH and SS and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yukiko Hikasa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Yukiko Hikasa received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences for travelling to attend the conference. Satoshi Suzuki, Shunsuke Tanabe, Kazuhiro Noma, Yasuhiro Shirakawa, and Toshiyoshi Fujiwara have no conflict of interest. Hiroshi Morimatsu received a research funding from Edwards Lifesciences.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (TIFF 578 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 21 KB)

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hikasa, Y., Suzuki, S., Tanabe, S. et al. Stroke volume variation and dynamic arterial elastance predict fluid responsiveness even in thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a prospective observational study. J Anesth 37, 930–937 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-023-03256-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-023-03256-7

Keywords

search

Navigation