PŘEHLEDOVÉ ČLÁNKY / REVIEW ARTICLES Vybrané limitace užití variací tepového objemu a pulzního tlaku | 115 / Anest intenziv Med. 2023;34(3):110-115 / ANESTEZIOLOGIE A INTENZIVNÍ MEDICÍNA www.aimjournal.cz 8. Mahjoub Y, Lejeune V, Muller L, Perbet S, Zieleskiewicz L, Bart F, et al. Evaluation of pulse pressure variation validity criteria in critically ill patients: a prospective observational multicentre point‑prevalence study. Br J Anaesth. 2014;112(4):681-685. 9. Fischer MO, Mahjoub Y, Boisselier C, Tavernier B, Dupont H, Leone M, et al. Arterial pulse pressure variation suitability in critical care: A French national survey. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2015;34(1):23-28. 10. Taniguchi LU, Zampieri FG, Nassar, AP. Applicability of respiratory variations in stroke volume and its surrogates for dynamic fluid responsiveness prediction in critically ill patients: a systematic review of the prevalence of required conditions. Rev. Bras Ter Intensiva. 2017;29(1):70-76. 11. Benes J, Zatloukal J, Kletecka J, Simanova A, Haidingerova L, Pradl R, et al. Respiratory induced dynamic variations of stroke volume and its surrogates as predictors of fluid responsiveness: applicability in the early stages of specific critical states. J Clin Monit Comput. 2014;28(3):225-231. 12. De Backer D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, Koch M, Vincent JL, et al. Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(4):517-523. 13. Serpa Neto A, Cardoso OS, Manetta JA, Pereira VGM, Esposito DC, Pasqualucci MdOP, et al. Association between use of lung‑protective ventilation with lower tidal volumes and clinical outcomes among patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta‑analysis. JAMA 2012;308(16):1651-1659. 14. Fan E, Brodie D, Slutsky AS. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment. JAMA. 2018;319(7):698-710. 15. Myatra SN, Prabu NR, Divatia JV, Monnet X, Kulkarni AP, Teboul JL, et al. The Changes in Pulse Pressure Variation or Stroke Volume Variation After a ‘Tidal Volume Challenge’ Reliably Predict Fluid Responsiveness During Low Tidal Volume Ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(3):415-421. 16. Messina A, Montagnini C, Cammarota G, De Rosa S, Giuliani F, Muratore L, et al. Tidal volume challenge to predict fluid responsiveness in the operating room: An observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2019;36(8):583-591. 17. Jun JH, Chung RK, Baik HJ, Chung MH, Hyeon JS, Lee YG, et al. The tidal volume challenge improves the reliability of dynamic preload indices during robot‑assisted laparoscopic surgery in the Trendelenburg position with lung‑protective ventilation. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019;19(1):142. 18. Wang X, Liu S, Gao J, Zhang Y, Huang T. Does tidal volume challenge improve the feasibility of pulse pressure variation in patients mechanically ventilated at low tidal volumes? A systematic review and meta‑analysis. Crit Care. 2023;27(1):45. 19. Monnet X, Bleibtreu A, Ferre A, Dres M, Gharbi R, Richard CH, et al. Passive leg‑raising and end‑expiratory occlusion tests perform better than pulse pressure variation in patients with low respiratory system compliance. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(1):152-157. 20. Xu Y, Guo J, Wu Q, Chen J. Efficacy of using tidal volume challenge to improve the reliability of pulse pressure variation reduced in low tidal volume ventilated critically ill patients with decreased respiratory system compliance. BMC Anesthesiol. 2022;22(1):137. 21. Ali A, Abdullah T, Sabanci PA, Dogan L, Orhan‑Sungur M, Akinici IO. Comparison of ability of pulse pressure variation to predict fluid responsiveness in prone and supine position: an observational study. J Clin Monit Comput. 2019;33(4):573-580. 22. Kim DH, Shin S, Kim JY, Kim SH, Jo M, Choi YS. Pulse pressure variation and pleth variability index as predictors of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing spinal surgery in the prone position. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018;14:1175-1183. 23. Mahjoub Y, Pila C, Friggeri A, Zogheib E, Lobjoie E, Tinturier F. Assessing fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients: False‑positive pulse pressure variation is detected by Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of the right ventricle. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(9):2570-2575. 24. Wyler von Ballmoos M, Takala J, Roeck M, Porta F, Tueller D, Ganter CC, et al. Pulse‑pressure variation and hemodynamic response in patients with elevated pulmonary artery pressure: a clinical study. Crit Care. 2010;14(3): R111. 25. Vieillard‑Baron A, Prigent A, Repesse X, Goudelin M, Prat G, Evrard B, et al. Right ventricular failure in septic shock: characterization, incidence and impact on fluid responsiveness. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):630. 26. Teboul JL, Monnet X, Chemla D, Michard F. Arterial Pulse Pressure Variation with Mechanical Ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199(1):22-31. 27. Renner J, Gruenewald M, Quaden R, Hanss R, Meybohm P, Steinfath M et al. Influence of increased intra‑abdominal pressure on fluid responsiveness predicted by pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation in a porcine model. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(2):650-658. 28. Jacques D, Bendjelid K, Duperret S, Colling J, Piriou V, Viale JP. Pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation during increased intra‑abdominal pressure: an experimental study. Crit Care. 2011;15(1):R33. 29. Alfonsi P, Viellard‑Baron A, Coggia M, Guignard B, Goeau‑Brissonniere O, Jardin F, et al. Cardiac function during intraperitoneal CO2 insufflation for aortic surgery: a transesophageal echocardiographic study. Anesth Analg. 2006;102(5):1304-1310. 30. Wajima Z, Shiga T, Imanaga K. Pneumoperitoneum affects stroke volume variation in humans. J Anesth. 2015;29(4):508-514. 31. Liu F, Zhu S, Ji Q, Li W, Liu J. The impact of intra‑abdominal pressure on the stroke volume variation and plethysmographic variability index in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Biosci Trends. 2015;9(2):129-133. 32. Høiseth LØ, Hoff IE, Myre K, Landsverk SA, Kirkebøen KA. Dynamic variables of fluid responsiveness during pneumoperitoneum and laparoscopic surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012;56(6):777-786. 33. Zlicar M, Novak‑Jankovic V, Blagus R, Cecconi M. Predictive values of pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation for fluid responsiveness in patients with pneumoperitoneum. J Clin Monit Comput. 2018;32(5):825-832. 34. Chin JH, Lee EH, Hwang GS, Choi WJ. Prediction of fluid responsiveness using dynamic preload indices in patients undergoing robot‑assisted surgery with pneumoperitoneum in the Trendelenburg position. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2013;41(4):515-522. 35. Liu X, Fu Q, Mi W, Liu H, Zhang H, Wang P, et al. Pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients experiencing intra ‑abdominal hypertension. Biosci Trends. 2013;7(2):101-108. 36. Guinot PG, de Broca B, Bernard E, Arab OA, Lorne E, Dupont H, et al. Respiratory stroke volume variation assessed by oesophageal Doppler monitoring predicts fluid responsiveness during laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth. 2014;112(4):660-664. 37. Moon EJ, Lee S, Yi JW, Kim JH, Lee BJ, Seo H, et al. Stroke Volume Variation and Stroke Volume Index Can Predict Fluid Responsiveness after Mini‑Volume Challenge Test in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Medicina (Kaunas). 2019;56(1):3. 38. Chen J, Zhao S, Zhu Q. Reliability of stroke volume or pulse pressure variation as dynamic predictors of fluid responsiveness in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review. J Clin Monit Comput. 2023;37(2):379-387. 39. Biais M, Ehrmann S, Mari A, Conte B, Mahjoub Y, Desebbe O, et al. Clinical relevance of pulse pressure variations for predicting fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients: the grey zone approach. Crit Care. 2014;18(6):587. 40. Cannesson M, Le Manach Y, Hofer CK, Goarin JP, Lehot JJ, Vallet B, et al. Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of pulse pressure variations for the prediction of fluid responsiveness: a ‘gray zone’ approach. Anesthesiology. 2011;115(2):231-241. 41. Le Manach Y, Hofer CK, Lehot JJ, Vallet B, Goarin JP, Tavernier B, et al. Can changes in arterial pressure be used to detect changes in cardiac output during volume expansion in the perioperative period? Anesthesiology. 2012;117(6):1165-1174. 42. Mallat J, Meddour M, Durville E, Lemyze M, Pepy F, Temime J, et al. Decrease in pulse pressure and stroke volume variations after mini‑fluid challenge accurately predicts fluid responsiveness. Br J Anaesth. 2015;115(3):449-456. 43. Mallat J, Fischer MO, Granier M, Vinsonneau C, Jonard M, Mahjoub Y, et al. Passive leg raising‑induced changes in pulse pressure variation to assess fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a multicentre prospective observational study. Br J Anaesth. 2022;129(3):308-316. 44. Ganter MT, Geisen M, Hartnack S, Dzemali O, Hofer CK. Prediction of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated cardiac surgical patients: the performance of seven different functional hemodynamic parameters. BMC Anesthesiol. 2018;18(1):55. 45. Hofer CK, Senn A, Weibel L, Zollinger A, et al. Assessment of stroke volume variation for prediction of fluid responsiveness using the modified FloTrac and PiCCOplus system. Crit Care. 2008;12(3): R82. 46. Derichard A, Robin E, Tavernier B, Costecalde M, Fleyfel M, Onimus J, et al. Automated pulse pressure and stroke volume variations from radial artery: evaluation during major abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2009;103(5):678-684. 47. de Wilde RBP, Geerts BF, van den Berg PCM, Jansen JRC, et al. A comparison of stroke volume variation measured by the LiDCOplus and FloTrac‑Vigileo system. Anaesthesia. 2009;64(9):1004-1009. 48. Mesquida J, Kim HK, Pinsky MR. Effect of tidal volume, intrathoracic pressure, and cardiac contractility on variations in pulse pressure, stroke volume, and intrathoracic blood volume. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(10):1672-1679. 49. Kim HK, Pinsky MR. Effect of tidal volume, sampling duration, and cardiac contractility on pulse pressure and stroke volume variation during positive‑pressure ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2008;36(10):2858-2862 50. Reuter DA, Kirchner A, Felbinger TW, Weis FC, Kilger E, Lamm P, et al. Usefulness of left ventricular stroke volume variation to assess fluid responsiveness in patients with reduced cardiac function. Crit Care Med. 2003;31(5):1399-1404. 51. Heenen S, De Backer D, Vincent JL. How can the response to volume expansion in patients with spontaneous respiratory movements be predicted? Crit Care. 2006;10(4): R102. 52. Teboul JL, Monnet X. Prediction of volume responsiveness in critically ill patients with spontaneous breathing activity. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2008;14(3):334-339. 53. Suk P, Zvoníček V, Pavlík M, Štětka P, Šrámek V. Dynamické parametry preloadu při ventilaci tlakovou podporou. Anest intenziv Med. 2009;20(3):137-142. 54. Wang C, Fengin Z, Cai J, et al. Accuracy of stroke volume variation and pulse pressure variation in predicting fluid responsiveness undergoing one‑lung ventilation during thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta‑analysis. Ann Transl Med. 2023;11(1):19. 55. Huan S, Dai J, Song S, Zhu G, Ji Y, Yin G. Stroke volume variation for predicting responsiveness to fluid therapy in patients undergoing cardiac and thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta‑analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12(5):e051112. 56. Ishihara H, Hashiba E, Okawa H, Saito J, Kasai T, Tsubo T. Neither dynamic, static, nor volumetric variables can accurately predict fluid responsiveness early after abdominothoracic esophagectomy. Perioper Med 2013, 2:3.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDA4Mjc=