Electrocardiometry Fluid Responsiveness in Pediatric Septic Shock.

Hemodynamic monitoring and categorization of patients based on fluid responsiveness is the key to decisions prompting the use of fluids and vasoactive agents in septic shock. Distinguishing patients who are going to benefit from fluids from those who will not is of paramount importance as large amounts of fluids used conventionally based on surviving sepsis guidelines may be detrimental. Noninvasive monitoring techniques for the assessment of various cardiovascular parameters are increasingly accepted as the current medical practice. Electrical cardiometry (EC) is one such method for the determination of stroke volume, cardiac output (CO), and other hemodynamic parameters and is based on changes in electrical conductivity within the thorax. It has been validated against gold standard methods such as thermodilution [Malik V, Subramanian A, Chauhan S, et al. World J 2014;4(7):101-108] and is being used more often as a point-of-care noninvasive technique for hemodynamic monitoring. EC is Food and Drug Administration approved and validated for use in neonates, children, and adults. A meta-analysis in 2016, including 20 studies and 624 patients comparing the accuracy of CO measurement by using EC with other noninvasive technologies, demonstrated that EC was the device that offered the most correct measurements. The article in the current issue of by Rao et al. (2020) has extended the use of EC to categorize pediatric patients with septic shock into vasodilated and vasoconstricted states based on systemic vascular resistance and correlate the categorization clinically. The authors also studied the changes in hemodynamic parameters after an isotonic fluid bolus of 20 mL/kg was administered. This is a pilot prospective observational study of 30 patients, which has given an insight into physiological rearrangements following fluid administration in patients with septic shock. Gupta D, Dhingra. Electrocardiometry Fluid Responsiveness in Pediatric Septic Shock. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(2):123-125.