nach oben

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

Erschienen in:

08.05.2018 | Original Research

A comparison of ventricular systolic function indices provided by VolumeView/EV1000™ and left ventricular ejection fraction by echocardiography among septic shock patients

verfasst von: Nitchakan Nakwan, Ply Chichareon, Bodin Khwannimit

Erschienen in: Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing | Ausgabe 2/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the cardiac function index (CFI) and global ejection fraction (GEF) obtained by VolumeView/EV1000™, with the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by echocardiography in septic shock patients. A prospective observational study was conducted in a medical intensive care unit of a tertiary, teaching university hospital. Thirty-two, mechanical-ventilated septic shock patients were included in this study. We simultaneously measured CFI and GEF with LVEF. The correlation of CFI, GEF along with LVEF and ability of CFI and GEF to predict LVEF ≥ 40, 50 and 60% were evaluated. There were 192 pairs of CFI, GEF and LVEF. CFI was significantly correlated with GEF (r = 0.82, P < 0.0001). A significant correlation was observed between CFI and LVEF (r = 0.56, P < 0.0001) and GEF and LVEF (r = 0.71, P < 0.0001). The CFI and GEF had a good predictive ability for estimating LVEF ≥ 40, 50 and 60%, with an area under receiving operating characteristic (AUC) 0.875–0.934. The CFI ≥ 3/min predicted LVEF ≥ 40% with sensitivity 95.1% and specificity 48.3%. The GEF ≥ 15%, estimated LVEF ≥ 40% with sensitivity 92.6% and specificity 69%. There were 40 thermodilution and LVEF measurements obtained before and after norepinephrine adjustment. Blood pressure as well as the cardiac index were significantly increased, whereas there were no changes in CFI, GEF and LVEF values. Conclusions: Both CFI and GEF obtained by VolumeView/EV1000™, correlated with LVEF, so as to provide a reliable estimation of LV systolic function in septic shock patients.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Antonelli M, Levy M, Andrews PJ, Chastre J, Hudson LD, Manthous C, Meduri GU, Moreno RP, Putensen C, Stewart T, et al. Hemodynamic monitoring in shock and implications for management. International Consensus Conference, Paris, France, 27–28 April 2006. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33(4):575–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-007-0531-4.

Saugel B, Huber W, Nierhaus A, Kluge S, Reuter DA, Wagner JY. Advanced hemodynamic management in patients with septic shock. Biomed Res Int. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8268569.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Teboul JL, Saugel B, Cecconi M, De Backer D, Hofer CK, Monnet X, Perel A, Pinsky MR, Reuter DA, Rhodes A, et al. Less invasive hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(9):1350–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-016-4375-7.CrossRefPubMed

Levitov A, Frankel HL, Blaivas M, Kirkpatrick AW, Su E, Evans D, Summerfield DT, Slonim A, Breitkreutz R, Price S, et al. Guidelines for the appropriate use of bedside general and cardiac ultrasonography in the evaluation of critically Ill patients-part II: cardiac ultrasonography. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(6):1206–27. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000001847.CrossRefPubMed

Guerin L, Vieillard-Baron A. The use of ultrasound in caring for patients with Sepsis. Clin Chest Med. 2016;37(2):299–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccm.2016.01.005.CrossRefPubMed

Vieillard-Baron A, Mayo PH, Vignon P, Cholley B, Slama M, Pinsky MR, McLean A, Choi G, Beaulieu Y, Arntfield R, et al. International consensus statement on training standards for advanced critical care echocardiography. Intensive Care Med. 2014;40(5):654–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-014-3228-5.CrossRef

De Geer L, Oscarsson A, Engvall J. Variability in echocardiographic measurements of left ventricular function in septic shock patients. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12947-015-0015-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

McGowan JH, Cleland JG. Reliability of reporting left ventricular systolic function by echocardiography: a systematic review of 3 methods. Am Heart J. 2003;146(3):388–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8703(03)00248-5.CrossRefPubMed

Monnet X, Teboul JL. Transpulmonary thermodilution: advantages and limits. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):147. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1739-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Sakka SG, Reuter DA, Perel A. The transpulmonary thermodilution technique. J Clin Monit Comput. 2012;26(5):347–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-012-9378-5.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bendjelid K, Giraud R, Siegenthaler N, Michard F. Validation of a new transpulmonary thermodilution system to assess global end-diastolic volume and extravascular lung water. Crit Care. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc9332.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Kiefer N, Hofer CK, Marx G, Geisen M, Giraud R, Siegenthaler N, Hoeft A, Bendjelid K, Rex S. Clinical validation of a new thermodilution system for the assessment of cardiac output and volumetric parameters. Crit Care. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc11366.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Combes A, Berneau JB, Luyt CE, Trouillet JL. Estimation of left ventricular systolic function by single transpulmonary thermodilution. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30(7):1377–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-004-2289-2.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Jabot J, Monnet X, Bouchra L, Chemla D, Richard C, Teboul JL. Cardiac function index provided by transpulmonary thermodilution behaves as an indicator of left ventricular systolic function. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(11):2913–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181b01fd9.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Perny J, Kimmoun A, Perez P, Levy B. Evaluation of cardiac function index as measured by transpulmonary thermodilution as an indicator of left ventricular ejection fraction in cardiogenic shock. Biomed Res Int. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/598029.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, Bellomo R, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith CM, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–10. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.0287.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Ray P, Le Manach Y, Riou B, Houle TT. Statistical evaluation of a biomarker. Anesthesiology. 2010;112(4):1023–40. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181d47604.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983;148(3):839–43. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.148.3.6878708.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Mutoh T, Kazumata K, Terasaka S, Taki Y, Suzuki A, Ishikawa T. Impact of transpulmonary thermodilution-based cardiac contractility and extravascular lung water measurements on clinical outcome of patients with Takotsubo cardiomyopathy after subarachnoid hemorrhage: a retrospective observational study. Crit Care. 2014;18(4). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-014-0482-4.

20.

Suzuki T, Suzuki Y, Okuda J, Kurazumi T, Suhara T, Ueda T, Nagata H, Morisaki H. Sepsis-induced cardiac dysfunction and β-adrenergic blockade therapy for sepsis. J Intensive Care. 2017;5:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-017-0215-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Fenton KE, Parker MM. Cardiac function and dysfunction in sepsis. Clin Chest Med. 2016;37(2):289–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccm.2016.01.014.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Berrios RAS, O’Horo JC, Velagapudi V, Pulido JN. Correlation of left ventricular systolic dysfunction determined by low ejection fraction and 30-day mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Crit Care. 2014;29(4):495–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.03.007.CrossRef

23.

Prabhu MM, Yalakala SK, Shetty R, Thakkar A, Sitapara T. Prognosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in septic shock patients. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(3):5–8.

24.

Charpentier J, Luyt CE, Fulla Y, Vinsonneau C, Cariou A, Grabar S, Dhainaut JF, Mira JP, Chiche JD. Brain natriuretic peptide: a marker of myocardial dysfunction and prognosis during severe sepsis. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(3):660–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.Ccm.0000114827.93410.D8.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Weng L, Liu YT, Du B, Zhou JF, Guo XX, Peng JM, Hu XY, Zhang SY, Fang Q, Zhu WL. The prognostic value of left ventricular systolic function measured by tissue Doppler imaging in septic shock. Crit Care. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc11328.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Parker MM, McCarthy KE, Ognibene FP. JE. P. Right ventricular dysfunction and dilatation, similar to left ventricular changes, characterize the cardiac depression of septic shock in humans. Chest. 1990;97(1):126–31.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Pulido JN, Afesa B, Masaki M, Yuasa T, Gillespie S, Herasevich V, Brown DR, Oh JK. Clinical spectrum, frequency, and significance of myocardial dysfunction in severe sepsis and septic shock. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87(7):620-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.01.018.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Vieillard-Baron A, Caille V, Charron C, Belliard G, Page B, Jardin F. Actual incidence of global left ventricular hypokinesia in adult septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2008;36(6):1701–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e318174db05.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Dalla K, Hallman C, Bech-Hanssen O, Haney M, Ricksten SE. Strain echocardiography identifies impaired longitudinal systolic function in patients with septic shock and preserved ejection fraction. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12947-015-0025-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Orde SR, Pulido JN, Masaki M, Gillespie S, Spoon JN, Kane GC, Oh JK. Outcome prediction in sepsis: speckle tracking echocardiography based assessment of myocardial function. Crit Care. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc13987.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: A comparison of ventricular systolic function indices provided by VolumeView/EV1000™ and left ventricular ejection fraction by echocardiography among septic shock patients
verfasst von: Nitchakan Nakwan
Ply Chichareon
Bodin Khwannimit
Publikationsdatum: 08.05.2018
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing / Ausgabe 2/2019
Print ISSN: 1387-1307
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2614
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-018-0152-1

Neu im Fachgebiet AINS

18.04.2024 | Wirbelsäulenmetastase | Nachrichten

Update AINS

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

hier abonnieren

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

A comparison of ventricular systolic function indices provided by VolumeView/EV1000™ and left ventricular ejection fraction by echocardiography among septic shock patients

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet AINS

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

Hochrisiko-Eingriffe für postoperative Übelkeit

Diclofenac-Gel versus Ibuprofen bei akuten Rückenschmerzen

Update AINS

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2019

Clinical implementation of electric impedance tomography in the treatment of ARDS: a single centre experience

IONM practice guidelines for the IONM supervising professional: some questions

Validation of a photoplethysmography device for detection of obstructive sleep apnea in the perioperative setting

In response: Blood CO2 exchange monitoring, Haldane effect and other calculations in sepsis and critical illness

Correction to: Is the new ASNM intraoperative neuromonitoring supervision “guideline” a trustworthy guideline? A commentary

EOY summary 2018

Neu im Fachgebiet AINS

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

Hochrisiko-Eingriffe für postoperative Übelkeit

Diclofenac-Gel versus Ibuprofen bei akuten Rückenschmerzen

Update AINS