Pulse pressure variation and systolic pressure variation in mechanically ventilated children

Johnny Nurman; Antonius H. Pudjiadi; Arwin A. P. Akib

doi:10.14238/pi51.1.2011.34-40

Johnny Nurman Department of Child Health, University of Indonesia Medical School/Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta
Antonius H. Pudjiadi Department of Child Health, University of Indonesia Medical School/Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta
Arwin A. P. Akib Department of Child Health, University of Indonesia Medical School/Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14238/pi51.1.2011.34-40

Keywords: pulse pressure variation, systolic pressure variation, hemodynamic monitoring, preload monitoring

Abstract

Background In mechanically ventilated patients, changes in breathing patterns may affect the preload, causing stroke volume fluctuation. Pulse pressure variation (PPV) and systolic pressure variation (SPV) are dynamic means of the hemodynamic monitoring in ventilated patients. No study on PPV and SPY in children has been reported to date.

Objective To study changes in PPV and SPY values in mechanically ventilated children.

Method A descriptive crossô€sectional study was done at the Pediatric Critical Care Unit (PICU), Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta. Subjects were mechanically ventilated children aged > 12 months. Echocardiography was performed in all patients to determine the cardiac index. Arterial pressure was measured by connecting an arterial line to a vital signs monitor. PPV and SPV were calculated using the standard formulas. Bivariate correlation tests were performed between cardiac index and PPV and between cardiac index and SPV. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was done to determine the optimum PPV and SPV cut-off points to predict normal cardiac index (2:3.5 L/minute/m²).

Results Eighteen patients were enrolled in the study, yielding 48 measurements. Mean cardiac index was 2.9 (SD 1-2.6) L/minute/m². Median PPV was 18.9 (range 4.1-45.5)% and SPV was 12.1 (range 3.8- 18.9)%. We found strong negative correlations between PPY and cardiac index (r= ; p = ) and SPY and cardiac index (r= ; p = ). To predict nonnal cardiac index, the optimum cut-off point was 11.4% for PPV (100% sensitivity, 100% specificity) and 9.45% for SPV (91.7% sensitivity, 100% specificity).

Conclusion In mechanically ventilated children, cardiac index is negatively correlated with PPV and SPV.

References

1. Rick JJ, Burke SS. Respiratory paradox. South Med J. 1978;71:1376â€¢8.
2. Perel A, Pizov R, Cotev S. Systolic blood pressure variation is a sensitive indicator of hypovolemia in ventilated dogs subjected to graded hemorrhage. Anesthesiology. 1987;67:498â€¢502.
3. Pizov R, Ya'ari Y, Perel A. The arterial pressure wavefonn during acute ventricular failure and synchronized external chest compression. Anesth Analg. 19S9;6S:150-6.
4. Preisman S, Disegni E, Vered Z, Perel A. Left ventricular preload and function during graded haemorrhage and retransfusion in pigs: Analysis of arterial pressure wavefonn and correlation with echocardiography. Br J Anesth. 2002;88:716-8.
5. BoldtJ, Lenz M, Kumle B, PapsdorfM.V olume replacement strategies on intensive care unit: Results from a postal survey. Intensive Care Med. 1998;24:147-51.
6. Powell FL, Heldt Gp, Haddad GG.R espiratory physiology.I n. Nichols DG, editor. Roger's textbook of pediatric intensive care. 4th Ed. Philadelphia : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008. p. 631-61.
7. Sherwood L. Sistem pernafasan. In: Santoso BI, editor. F isiologi manusia: dari sel ke sistem. 2nd Ed.J akarta: EGC; 2001. p. 410-59.
8. Bilchick KC, Wise RA. Paradoxical physical findings described by Kussmaul: Pulsus paradoxus and Kussmaul's sign. Lancet. 2002;359:1940-2.
9. Michard F, Chernla D, Richard C, Wysocki M, Pinsky MR, Lecarpentier Y, et al. Clinical use of respiratory changes in arterial pulse pressure to monitor the hemodynamic effect of PEEP. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;159:935-9.
10. Michard F, Boussat S, Chemla D, Anguel N, Mercat A, Lecarpentier Y, et al. Relation between respiratory changes in arterial pulse pressure and fluid responsiveness in septic patient with acute circulatory failure. AmJ Respir Crit Care Med.2000;162:134-8.
11. Morgan BC, Martin WE, Hornbein TF, Crawford EW, Guntheroth WG. Hemodynamic effect of intermittentpositive pressure ventilation. Anesthesiology. 1966;27:5S4-90.
12. Coudray A, RomandJA, TreggiariM.F luid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients: A review of indexes used in intensive care. Crit Care Med. 2005;33:2757-62.
13. Jardin F, Vieillard-Baron A. Right ventricular function and positive pressure ventilation in clinical practice: from hemodynamic subset to respiratory settings. Intensive Care Med.2003;29:1426-34.
14. Mahjoub Y, Pila C, F riggeriA, Zogheib E, Lobjoie E, Tinturier F, et al.A ssessing fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients: F alseô€£positive pulse pressure variation is detected by D oppler echocardiographic evaluation of the right ventricle.Crit Care Med.2009;37:2570-5.
15. Park MK, Troxler RG. Echocardiography, noninvasive techniques. In: Park MK, editor. Pediatric cardiology for practitioners. 5th Ed.M isssouri: Mosby; 200S. p. 67-76.
16. Auler JO, Galas F, Hajjar L, Santos L, Carvalho T, Michard F. O nline monitoring of pulse pressure variation to guide fluid therapy after cardiac surgery. Anesthesiology. 2008; 106:1201-6.
17. Backer D D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, Koch M, Vincent JJ. Pulse pressure to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31:517-23.
I8. Brenan JM, Blair JEA, Hampole C, Goonewardena S, Vasaiwala S, Shah D, et al. Radial artery pulse pressure variation correlates with brachial artery peak velocity variation in ventilated subjects when measured by internal medicine residents using handô€£carried ultrasound devices. Chest. 2007;131:1301-7.
19. Dhal MK, Vistisen ST, Koefoed IN, Larsson A. Using an expiratory resistor, arterial pulse pressure variations predict fhud responsiveness during spontaneous breathing: an experimental porcine study. Crit Care. 2009; 13:R39.
20. Heenen S, Backer D D, Vincent JJ. How can the response to volume expansion in patients v.ith spontaneous respiratory movements be predicted? Crit Care. 2006; 0:R102.
21. Kubitz JC, Forkl S, Annecke T, Kronas N, Goetz AE, Reute rDA. Systolic pressure variation and pulse pressure variation during modifications of arterial pressure. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34:1520-4.
22. Carcillo JA, Fields AI. Clinical practice parameters for hemody namic support of pediatric and neonatal patients in septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2002;30:1365-78.
23. Vieillard-Baron A, Augarde R, Prin S, Page B, Beauchet A, Jardin F. Influence of superior vena cava zone conditions on cyclic changes in right ventricular outflow during respiratory support. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:1083-8.