Rapid Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness by Pulse Pressure at the Femoral and Radial Sites in Patients with Septic Shock

Chen Ming,Qian Yajun,Li Jing,Liu Yang,Chen Xiancheng,Gu Qin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/j.issn.1673-4777.2019.12.019
2019-01-01
Abstract:Objective To determine whether pulse pressure changes recorded at the femoral and radial sites during fluid challenge can evaluate fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock.Methods Fifty-five patients who met the criteria of septic shock were enrolled from February 2013 to November 2018 in Intensive Care Unit of Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital.All patients received fluid challenge by intravenous infusion of 500 ml 0.9% sodium chloride in 30 min.The responders were defined as patients who showed an increase in stroke volume index(SVI) ≥ 15% after fluid challenge.Femoral pulse pressure(PPr),radial pulse pressure (PPR) and SVI were measured before and after fluid challenge.Relations among the difference values of PPF,PPR and SVI (△PPF,△PPR and △SVI) were analyzed by linear regression.Assessment values of PPF and PPR change percentages for fluid responsiveness were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Results After fluid challenge,PPF and PPR significantly increased and systemic vascular resistance index significantly decreased compared with those before treatment in the responders(22 cases) [(59 ± 16)mmHg vs (49 ± 16)mmHg,(47 ± 18)mmHg vs (38 ± 18)mmHg,987(917,1 703) (dyn · s)/(cm5 · m2) vs 1 526(1 241,1 998)dyn · s/(cm5 · m2)](all P < 0.05);there was no significant change in the nonresponders (33 cases) (all P > 0.05).Linear regression analysis showed that △PPF and △PPR were positively correlated with △SVI(r =0.801,0.551,both P <0.001).Areas under ROC curve of PPF and PPR change percentages for fluid responsiveness were 0.787 and 0.665;the best cut-off values were 12.8% increase in PPF and 7.7% increase in PPR;the sensitivities were 81.8% and 77.3%;the specificities were 66.7% and 54.5%.Conclusion In patients with septic shock,PPr and PPR can be used as indicators in rapid assessment of fluid responsiveness after fluid resuscitation;PPF is more accurate than PPR in the assessment.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?