AzTrials
AzTrials

Hemodynamic InstabilityNCT01569308

Pulse Pressure Variation Helps to Predict Fluid Responsiveness in Patients Ventilated With Low Tidal Volumes

An observational study of Hemodynamic Instability, run by Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre at 1 site in Brazil.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Objective: To determine the value of pulse pressure variation (ΔRESPPP) to predict fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes (VT), and to investigate whether a lower ΔRESPPP cut-off point should be used when patients are ventilated with low tidal volumes. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 16 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Hemodynamic Instability
How many people
38 participants
Where
1 siteBrazil
Study dates
May 2006to Oct 2009
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 16 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Study population: Patients age ≥ 16 years, from both genders, admitted to the HCPA ICU, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, with hemodynamic instability defined as need for norepinephrine infusion and/or intravascular fluid administration to maintain systolic arterial blood pressure > 90 mm Hg; with arterial line in place (radial or femoral) and pulmonary arterial catheter in place.

Who may be able to join

  • Age ≥ 16 years
  • Hemodynamic instability defined as need for norepinephrine infusion and/or intravascular fluid administration to maintain systolic arterial blood pressure > 90 mm Hg
  • Arterial line in place (radial or femoral)
  • Pulmonary arterial catheter in place

Who cannot join

  • Presence of cardiac arrhythmias
  • Presence of pneumothorax
  • Presence of heart valve disease or intracardiac shunt
  • Previously diagnosed right ventricular insufficiency

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Brazil1 site
  • Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre

    Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 90035903

Other trials in Brazil

About this study

Objective: To determine the value of pulse pressure variation (ΔRESPPP) to predict fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes (VT), and to investigate whether a lower ΔRESPPP cut-off point should be used when patients are ventilated with low tidal volumes.

Methods: This cross-sectional, observational study included 37 critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure requiring fluid challenge. They were sedated and mechanically ventilated with Tidal Volume (VT) 6-7 ml/kg IBW (ideal body weight), monitored by pulmonary artery catheter and arterial line. Mechanical ventilation and hemodynamic parameters, including ΔRESPPP, were measured before and after fluid challenge with 1,000 ml crystalloids or 500 ml colloids. Fluid responsiveness was defined as an increase of at least 15% in cardiac index.

Read more

The present study was designed to (1) determine the value of ΔRESPPP to predict fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes, and (2) to investigate whether a lower ΔRESPPP cut-off point should be used when patients are ventilated with low tidal volumes.

The study hypothesis is not a good predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes.

Read the detailed description

Volume expansion is frequently used to treat critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure. The goal of volume expansion is to increase left ventricular stroke volume and consequently cardiac output. However, about 50% of patients with acute circulatory failure will respond to fluid challenge (preload- dependent patients). Therefore, the ability to predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients is crucial, particularly for ARDS patients because of increased alveolar-capillary membrane permeability, and avoiding unnecessary fluid loading has been shown to have a positive effect on patient outcome.Among the dynamic parameters used at the bedside to identify fluid responsiveness, pulse pressure variation (ΔRESPPP) is one of the most accurate in patients with acute circulatory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. However, most studies evaluated patients ventilated with large tidal volumes (≥ 8 ml/kg). Therefore, the validity of ΔRESPPP to identify fluid responsiveness is still debated when lower tidal volumes are used.

The current literature about its performance during ventilation with low tidal volumes is unclear, and opposite conclusions have been drawn. The present study was designed to (1) determine the value of ΔRESPPP to predict fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes, and (2) to investigate whether a lower ΔRESPPP cut-off point should be used when patients are ventilated with low tidal volumes.

Methods: This cross-sectional, observational study included 37 critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure requiring fluid challenge. They were sedated and mechanically ventilated with Tidal Volume (VT) 6-7 ml/kg IBW (ideal body weight), monitored by pulmonary artery catheter and arterial line. Mechanical ventilation and hemodynamic parameters, including ΔRESPPP, were measured before and after fluid challenge with 1,000 ml crystalloids or 500 ml colloids. Fluid responsiveness was defined as an increase of at least 15% in cardiac index.

Patients were followed for 28 days or until discharge from the ICU.

Study Protocol Patients were sedated with midazolan and fentanyl (score of -4 to -5 in the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale)and ventilated in controlled pressure or controlled volume mode (Servo I system v.12 or Servo 900 C, Siemens, Sweden) with VT < 8 ml/kg IBW (51 + 0.9[height in cm- 152.9] for men and 45.5 + 0.91[height in cm- 152.9] for women). Ventilatory and hemodynamic variables were measured before and after FC with the patients in a supine position. Zero pressure was measured at the midaxillary line. The correct position of the pulmonary artery catheter in West's zone 3 was checked as described in the literature.

Fluid challenge was performed with 1000 ml 0.9% saline solution or lactated Ringer's solution (n=36) or 500 ml hydroxy-ethyl-starch solution 6% 130/0.4 for 30 minutes (n=2).

Hemodynamic Parameters

Variations in arterial pulse pressure were visualized on bedside monitors (HP S66 and PHILIPS IntelliVue, MP60, Germany) and measured with the cursor for each of 5 breathing cycles. ΔRESPPP was calculated using the following equation:

ΔRESPPP (%) = 100 x (PPmax - PPmin) / [(PPmax + PPmin)/2]

where PPmax and PPmin are the maximal pulse pressure at inspiration and the pulse pressure obtained on expiration, respectively.

A pulmonary artery catheter (Edwards Healthcare, Irvine, CA) was used to measure cardiac output according to the thermal dilution method (3 injections of 10ml 0.9% saline solution), systolic, diastolic and mean pulmonary arterial pressures, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP, mmHg), central venous pressure (CVP, mmHg), and mixed venous saturation (SvO2). Mean arterial pressure (MAP, mmHg), measured using the arterial line, and heart rate (HR, bpm) were also recorded. All measurements were made at the end of expiration, before and after FC. Patients were defined as fluid responders when cardiac index increased at least 15% of baseline value.

Ventilation Parameters The following ventilatory parameters were measured: inspiratory and expiratory tidal volume, respiratory rate (RR), plateau pressure (cmH2O), peak pressure (cmH2O), total positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEPtot), static compliance (Cst) and driving pressure (DP= Pplat-PEEP). All measurements were made before and after FC.

Statistical Analysis Sample size was defined as 38 patients for estimation of the correlation between CI and ΔRESPPP 0.5 (moderate to high magnitude), with a level of significance of 0.05 and power of 90%.

The effects of FC on hemodynamic parameters were assessed using a paired Student's t-test for normally distributed variables or a nonparametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank test for non-normally distributed variables. The comparison of hemodynamic parameters between both groups at baseline and after FC was assessed using a two sample Student's t-test or a nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test. Results were expressed as mean values±SD or median (25-75 percentiles).

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to evaluate the ability of ΔRESPPP, ΔRESPPP/DP, CVP and PAOP to predict fluid responsiveness. The best cut-off value for ΔRESPPP ROC curve was determined for the entire population. In addition, measures of diagnostic performance were calculated: sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratio. Linear correlations were tested using the Spearman rank method. Data were analyzed using SPSS 15.0. A p value <0.05 was considered significant.

Keywords
Cardiac output, Pulse pressure variation, Fluid responsiveness, Low tidal volume

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Increase in cardiac index at least 15% of baseline value.

    Patients were sedated and ventilated in controlled pressure or controlled volume mode (Servo I system v.12 or Servo 900 C, Siemens, Sweden) with VT < 8 ml/kg ideal body weight. Ventilatory and hemodynamic variables were measured before and after FC with the patients in a supine position. Fluid challenge was performed with 1000 ml 0.9% saline solution or lactated Ringer's solution or 500 ml hydroxy-ethyl-starch solution 6% 130/0.4 for 30 minutes. The increase in cardiac index was measured immediately after fluid challenge.

    Measured: Cardiac index was measured at the end of a 30 minutes fluid challenge.

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Mortality

    Patients were followed for 28 days or until ICU discharge

    Measured: 28 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted3 Apr 2012 (estimated)
  2. Study startMay 2006
  3. Primary completionOct 2009
  4. Study completionOct 2009

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrolment
38 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01569308
Sponsor's protocol ID
06-109
Status last verified
Mar 2012
First submitted
14 Mar 2012
Last updated
3 Apr 2012
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Publications

  • Oliveira-Costa CD, Friedman G, Vieira SR, Fialkow L. Pulse pressure variation and prediction of fluid responsiveness in patients ventilated with low tidal volumes. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2012 Jul;67(7):773-8. doi: 10.6061/clinics/2012(07)12.

    PubMed 22892922

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Hemodynamic Instability, run by Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre at 1 site in Brazil.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Apr 2012. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Brazil. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Increase in cardiac index at least 15% of baseline value. (time frame: Cardiac index was measured at the end of a 30 minutes fluid challenge.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01569308, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Apr 2012.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in