University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, USA.
Am J Crit Care. 2013 Jul;22(4):298-305. doi: 10.4037/ajcc2013295.
Functional hemodynamic indicators (systolic pressure variation [SPV and SPV%] and pulse pressure variation [PPV%]) are sensitive and specific indicators of fluid responsiveness. It was unknown if these indicators could be accurately measured directly from the bedside monitor.
Determine the accuracy of SPV, SPV%, and PPV% measurements by using a stop-cursor method compared with a digitized analog strip (gold standard).
A prospective observational study using a convenience sample of 30 adult patients in a medical-surgical intensive care unit who were receiving mechanical ventilation and had no spontaneous breaths during 3 sequential ventilator breaths and had an optimized arterial catheter. The peak and nadir arterial pressure values for a ventilator cycle were simultaneously obtained by using the stop-cursor method on the bedside monitor and a hardcopy strip. The indicators were averaged over 3 breaths, and the difference between methods was calculated.
Data were analyzed from 29 patients (1 patient excluded) on assist control ventilation (mean [SD] for tidal volume, 7.5 [2] mL/kg; positive end-expiratory pressure, 7 [4] cm H2O). For SPV, the mean bias was 0.4 (SD, 0.9) mm Hg (95% limits of agreement [LOA], -1.4 to 2.2 mm Hg); for SPV%, 0.3 (SD, 0.9; 95% LOA, -1.5% to 2.1%); for PPV%, 1.0 (SD, 3.3; 95% LOA, -5.5% to 7.5%). In only 1 case (PPV%) was there disagreement on fluid response characterization.
Statistically significant small differences in SPV and SPV% were detected. The differences in SPV, SPV%, and PPV% were not clinically significant, suggesting that functional hemodynamic indicators can be obtained accurately with the stop-cursor method.
功能血流动力学指标(收缩压变化[SPV 和 SPV%]和脉压变化[PPV%])是液体反应性的敏感和特异性指标。尚不清楚这些指标是否可以直接从床边监护仪准确测量。
使用停止光标法与数字化模拟条(金标准)比较,确定 SPV、SPV%和 PPV%测量的准确性。
这是一项使用便利样本的前瞻性观察性研究,纳入 30 名在医疗外科重症监护病房接受机械通气且在连续 3 次呼吸机呼吸期间无自主呼吸且动脉导管优化的成年患者。使用床边监护仪上的停止光标法和硬拷贝条同时获得呼吸机周期的峰值和谷值动脉压值。对 3 次呼吸进行平均,并计算两种方法之间的差异。
对 29 名辅助控制通气患者(平均潮气量[SD]为 7.5[2]mL/kg;呼气末正压[PEEP]为 7[4]cm H2O)的数据进行了分析。对于 SPV,平均偏差为 0.4(SD,0.9)mmHg(95%一致性界限[LOA]为-1.4 至 2.2mmHg);对于 SPV%,为 0.3(SD,0.9;95% LOA 为-1.5%至 2.1%);对于 PPV%,为 1.0(SD,3.3;95% LOA 为-5.5%至 7.5%)。只有 1 例(PPV%)在液体反应特征的描述上存在分歧。
检测到 SPV 和 SPV%的统计学上显著的小差异。SPV、SPV%和 PPV%的差异无临床意义,提示使用停止光标法可以准确获得功能血流动力学指标。