Comparison of bedside assessed arm and leg fl uid fi ltration determined by venous congestion plethysmography in perioperative cancer patients An observational study investigating agreement
O. Hunsicker,Sandra Heinig,Jana-Jennifer Dathe,A. Krannich,C. Spies,Aarne Feldheiser
Abstract:In recent years, pathophysiology and clinical impact of microvascular fluid filtration has regained interest. As the latest data in surgical patients have been published almost 20 years ago, there is need for further research to better understand fluid filtration during the perioperative period. Venous congestion plethysmography (VCP) provides a rapid and noninvasive method, which has been shown suitable for the assessment of fluid filtration in limbs. Fluid filtration assessed by VCP can be obtained from forearm and calf measurement sites, while in many clinical situations a reduced access to the patient often restricts the measurements to patient’s forearm. We aimed to investigate if fluid filtration obtained from forearm and calf measurement site is interchangeable in nonsedated perioperative patients. Fluid filtration by VCP was obtained simultaneously from forearm and calf in patients with ovarian cancer at 4 time points during the perioperative course and assessed by the difference of volume changes of the limb between third and sixth minutes (VC6-3min) during venous congestion. VC6-3min obtained from forearm and calf measurement sites was compared with respect to agreement and evaluated regarding the association with the presence of leg edema. A total of 74 paired measurements were analyzed in 29 patients. Forearm VC6-3min was significantly higher than calf VC6-3min (median [25th; 75th quartile], 0.6 (0.4; 0.9) vs 0.4 [0.3; 0.6] %, P=0.008). Bland–Altman and Polar analysis revealed a poor agreement between forearm and calf VC6-3min at predefined time points and changes of VC6-3min during the perioperative course (bias +0.23%, limits of agreement [LOA] 1.1% to 1.6%; angular bias 2.5°, radial LOA 82° to +77°). Forearm VC6-3min was significantly increased in patients with presence of leg edema (0.7 (0.5; 1.0) vs 0.5 (0.4; 0.6) %, P<0.001) while calf VC6-3min did not differ in patients with and without edema. Editor: Wilhelm Mistiaen. This article was presented in part at the European Society of Anaesthesiology EUROANAESTHESIA 2015 Annual Meeting in Berlin, May 2015. Study concept, design of the study: AF, CS. Biometrical planning: AF. Acquisition of data: AF, SH, J-JD. Interpretation of data: OH, SH, CS, AF. Statistical analysis: AK, OH, AF. Drafting of the manuscript: OH, AF. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: all authors. Final revision of manuscript: OH, AF. Obtained funding: CS. Study supervision: AF, CS. This research was an investigator-initiated study that was funded by departmental sources. It was supported by ELCAT GmbH (Wolfratshausen, Germany) providing the mercury in-Silastic strain-gauge venous congestion plethysmography device within a loan agreement. The company had no input into, or control over, study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the paper for publication. Ethical approval was given by the Ethical Committee of Charité—University Medicine Berlin (No. EA1/004/11). The study was internationally subscribed: NCT01311297 (registered 08/03/2011, https://clinicaltrials.gov/). The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. a Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Department of Biostatistics, Coordination Center for Clinical Trials, Charité—University Medicine Berlin, c Berlin Institute of Health, Clinical Research Unit—Biostatistics Unit, Berlin, Germany. ∗ Correspondence: Aarne Feldheiser, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité— University Medicine Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany (e-mail: aarne.feldheiser@charite.de). Copyright © 2017 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the