Key result
The pleth variability index did not accurately predict fluid responsiveness overall (AUC 0.60, P=0.11), but its predictive ability improved in patients with higher perfusion index values.
Why the study?
Does the pleth variability index (PVI) accurately predict fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery?
Population
81 patients undergoing elective coronary artery surgery
Comparison
Pleth variability index monitoring during… vs Pulse pressure variation, stroke volume…
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
PVI should not guide fluid decisions in coronary artery surgery; leaves open whether perfusion index stratification enhances utility in validation studies.
Observational (n=81)
Does the pleth variability index (PVI) accurately predict fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.60
p-value: p=0.11
The pleth variability index is not a reliable predictor of fluid responsiveness overall in cardiac surgery patients, but its accuracy improves in those with higher baseline perfusion states.
Broch et al. (2011) conducted an observational in Elective coronary artery surgery (n=81). Pleth variability index (PVI) vs. Pulse pressure variation (PPV), stroke volume variation (SVV), and central venous pressure (CVP) was evaluated on Fluid responsiveness (increase in stroke volume index >15% after passive leg raising) (AUC 0.60, p=0.11). The pleth variability index did not accurately predict fluid responsiveness overall (AUC 0.60, P=0.11), but its predictive ability improved in patients with higher perfusion index values.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: