Why the study?
The incidence of fluid responsiveness to a fluid challenge and the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic variables (PPV, SPV, SVV, and PVI) for predicting fluid responsiveness in normotensive anaesthetised dogs were unknown.
Do PPV, SPV, SVV, and PVI accurately predict fluid responsiveness to a fluid challenge in normotensive dogs under anaesthesia?
Do PPV, SPV, SVV, and PVI accurately predict fluid responsiveness to a fluid challenge in normotensive dogs under anaesthesia?
In normotensive dogs under inhalant anesthesia, pulse pressure variation and plethysmographic variability index are highly accurate predictors of fluid responsiveness.
Fluid responsiveness incidence and dynamic index accuracy in anaesthetized dogs need prospective validation; leaves open clinical adoption in veterinary practice.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of fluid responsiveness (FR) to a fluid challenge (FC) in normotensive dogs under anaesthesia. The accuracy of pulse pressure variation (PPV), systolic pressure variation (SPV), stroke volume variation (SVV), and plethysmographic variability index (PVI) for predicting FR was also evaluated. Dogs were anaesthetised with methadone, propofol, and inhaled isoflurane in oxygen, under volume-controlled mechanical ventilation. FC was performed by the administration of 5 mL/kg of Ringer’s lactate within 5 min. Cardiac index (CI; L/min/m2), PPV, (%), SVV (%), SPV (%), and PVI (%) were registered before and after FC. Data were analysed with ANOVA and ROC tests (p < 0.05). Fluid responsiveness was defined as 15% increase in CI. Eighty dogs completed the study. Fifty (62.5%) were responders and 30 (37.5%) were nonresponders. The PPV, PVI, SPV, and SVV cut-off values (AUC, p) for discriminating responders from nonresponders were PPV >13.8% (0.979, <0.001), PVI >14% (0.956, <0.001), SPV >4.1% (0.793, <0.001), and SVV >14.7% (0.729, <0.001), respectively. Up to 62.5% of normotensive dogs under inhalant anaesthesia may be fluid responders. PPV and PVI have better diagnostic accuracy to predict FR, compared to SPV and SVV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Skouropoulou et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: