Fluidoresponsividade em pacientes críticos sob ventilação mecânica: da pressão venosa central para ecocardiografia à beira leito

Abstract

Introduction: Predictig fluid responsiveness remains a constant challenge for physicians dealing with hemodynamically unstable patients. The use of static parameters, such as central venous pressure (CVP), although used for decades is not a trustworthy source, and the suggestion derived from more robust evidence suggests that the use of such should be abandoned. Over the last 15 years, various dynamic tests have been developed based on the principle of altering the cardiac preload, by using the heart-lung interactions and consequently cardiac output. Hence, Passive Leg Raising (PLR), the intake of small amounts of fluid, the variation of pulse pressure, variations in the diameter of large veins have all been widely used for evaluating fluid responsiveness (FR), within this context. Objective: The underlying objective behind this study was to test, if the non-invasive evaluation with transthoracic echocardiography, the Subaortic velocity time integral (VTI), the Distensibility Index of the Inferior Vena Cava (dIVC), the mitral velocity time integral (MTI), the (CVP) and the change in pulse pressure (ΔPP) after (PLR) and fluid infusion (500ml of saline solution) are able to predict the responsiveness of fluid therapy. Methods: Thirty one hemodynamically unstable patients, under mechanical ventilation (MV) were included in the study. Evaluations were made of VTI, MTI, DIVC), ΔPP and CVP before any intervention, after PLR and after infusion of 500ml saline solution. The variations of the parameters were calculated for all patients. Results: After PLR and infusion of saline solution, the VTI increased by 10% or more in 14 (45%) and 18 (58%) patients, respectively, defined as fluid responders. The PLR predicted a response capacity to fluids with a sensibility of 77,7%, specificity of 100%, a positive predictive value of 100% and a false positive probability of 0%. The CVP, dIVC, ΔPP, PAM and the medical evaluation were not capable of providing an adequate FR evaluation. Conclusion: In hemodynamically unstable patients under MV, PLR were capable of precisely predicting the capacity of FR.