Validity of pulse pressure and systolic blood pressure variation data obtained from a Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness during surgery
A simple, inexpensive method is needed for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients during surgery. A previously described method using the Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor to record arterial and pulse pressure might be accurate enough to use for this purpose. In this study, 26 patients undergoing schedu...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology 2010-10, Vol.22 (4), p.316-322 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 322 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 316 |
container_title | Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology |
container_volume | 22 |
creator | Qiao, Hui Zhang, Jun Liang, Wei-min |
description | A simple, inexpensive method is needed for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients during surgery. A previously described method using the Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor to record arterial and pulse pressure might be accurate enough to use for this purpose.
In this study, 26 patients undergoing scheduled craniotomy surgery, we compared measurement of systolic pressure variation (SPV) (measured as both mm Hg and %) and pulse pressure variation (PPV%) using the Ohmeda monitor method to simultaneously measurement of a reference standard, stroke volume variation (SVV) determined with an Edwards FloTrac/Vigileo monitor, during volume loading.
Variation in systolic pressure, pulse pressure, and stroke volume all decreased proportionally as fluid volume increased. The 3 test parameters, SPV (%), SPV (mm Hg), and PPV (%) were highly correlated to SVV, the reference standard. Bland-Altman plots comparing SPV (%) and PPV with SVV showed agreement with this standard. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed no significant difference between the 3 test parameters for predicting the vascular response to fluid infusion.
There were no significant differences between SPV and PPV estimation using the Ohmeda monitor method and the reference SVV measurement for predicting vascular changes in response to fluid loading. The Ohmeda monitor method requires less sophisticated technology and is much less expensive than other methods. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/ANA.0b013e3181e41299 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_755186665</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>755186665</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-9e5b8d8c05a40baee53d27dd5ad2be776c5e6f9e7aab90970bc709888c79aadb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcFuFDEMhiMEotvCGyCUG1ymTTKbSXJctVCQKnpo4TpyEk8JmpkMSaZiH4c3JVULSD30YNmSP_-2_BPyhrNjzow62X3ZHTPLeIst1xy3XBjzjGy4bFXDjeDPyYZpo5ttrQ_IYc4_GGNGSPWSHAjWCdFpuSG_v8EYfCh7Gge6rGNGuiTMeU1IYfY073OJY3DUjjH6_71bSAFKiDP1UIBGWyDM6OmQ4kSBnkHBX_Ty-4Qe6NWJpFOcQ4mJDjWqiA-uhPmGDuMaPK2iS5xzuMW5ylO_prte3XODaf-KvBig3vX6IR-Rrx8_XJ9-ai4uzz-f7i4a17amNAal1V47JmHLLCDK1gvlvQQvLCrVOYndYFABWFP_x6xTzGitnTIA3rZH5N297pLizxVz6aeQHY4jzBjX3Cspue66Tlby_ZMkZ5wLrowyFd3eoy7FnBMO_ZLCBGlfof7Oxr7a2D-2sY69fdiw2vrCf0N_fWv_AC0qngA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1011217979</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validity of pulse pressure and systolic blood pressure variation data obtained from a Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness during surgery</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Qiao, Hui ; Zhang, Jun ; Liang, Wei-min</creator><creatorcontrib>Qiao, Hui ; Zhang, Jun ; Liang, Wei-min</creatorcontrib><description>A simple, inexpensive method is needed for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients during surgery. A previously described method using the Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor to record arterial and pulse pressure might be accurate enough to use for this purpose.
In this study, 26 patients undergoing scheduled craniotomy surgery, we compared measurement of systolic pressure variation (SPV) (measured as both mm Hg and %) and pulse pressure variation (PPV%) using the Ohmeda monitor method to simultaneously measurement of a reference standard, stroke volume variation (SVV) determined with an Edwards FloTrac/Vigileo monitor, during volume loading.
Variation in systolic pressure, pulse pressure, and stroke volume all decreased proportionally as fluid volume increased. The 3 test parameters, SPV (%), SPV (mm Hg), and PPV (%) were highly correlated to SVV, the reference standard. Bland-Altman plots comparing SPV (%) and PPV with SVV showed agreement with this standard. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed no significant difference between the 3 test parameters for predicting the vascular response to fluid infusion.
There were no significant differences between SPV and PPV estimation using the Ohmeda monitor method and the reference SVV measurement for predicting vascular changes in response to fluid loading. The Ohmeda monitor method requires less sophisticated technology and is much less expensive than other methods.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0898-4921</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-1921</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/ANA.0b013e3181e41299</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20622685</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Adult ; Anesthesia, General ; Area Under Curve ; Blood pressure ; Blood Pressure - physiology ; Central Venous Pressure - physiology ; Craniotomy ; Data processing ; Female ; Fluid Therapy ; Hemodynamics - physiology ; Humans ; Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives ; Infusion fluids ; Intraoperative Period ; Likelihood Functions ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Monitoring, Intraoperative - instrumentation ; Neurosurgery ; Plasma Substitutes ; Pulmonary Artery - physiology ; Pulmonary Wedge Pressure - physiology ; Reference Standards ; ROC Curve ; Stroke ; Surgery</subject><ispartof>Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology, 2010-10, Vol.22 (4), p.316-322</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-9e5b8d8c05a40baee53d27dd5ad2be776c5e6f9e7aab90970bc709888c79aadb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-9e5b8d8c05a40baee53d27dd5ad2be776c5e6f9e7aab90970bc709888c79aadb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20622685$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Qiao, Hui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liang, Wei-min</creatorcontrib><title>Validity of pulse pressure and systolic blood pressure variation data obtained from a Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness during surgery</title><title>Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology</title><addtitle>J Neurosurg Anesthesiol</addtitle><description>A simple, inexpensive method is needed for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients during surgery. A previously described method using the Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor to record arterial and pulse pressure might be accurate enough to use for this purpose.
In this study, 26 patients undergoing scheduled craniotomy surgery, we compared measurement of systolic pressure variation (SPV) (measured as both mm Hg and %) and pulse pressure variation (PPV%) using the Ohmeda monitor method to simultaneously measurement of a reference standard, stroke volume variation (SVV) determined with an Edwards FloTrac/Vigileo monitor, during volume loading.
Variation in systolic pressure, pulse pressure, and stroke volume all decreased proportionally as fluid volume increased. The 3 test parameters, SPV (%), SPV (mm Hg), and PPV (%) were highly correlated to SVV, the reference standard. Bland-Altman plots comparing SPV (%) and PPV with SVV showed agreement with this standard. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed no significant difference between the 3 test parameters for predicting the vascular response to fluid infusion.
There were no significant differences between SPV and PPV estimation using the Ohmeda monitor method and the reference SVV measurement for predicting vascular changes in response to fluid loading. The Ohmeda monitor method requires less sophisticated technology and is much less expensive than other methods.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anesthesia, General</subject><subject>Area Under Curve</subject><subject>Blood pressure</subject><subject>Blood Pressure - physiology</subject><subject>Central Venous Pressure - physiology</subject><subject>Craniotomy</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fluid Therapy</subject><subject>Hemodynamics - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives</subject><subject>Infusion fluids</subject><subject>Intraoperative Period</subject><subject>Likelihood Functions</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Monitoring, Intraoperative - instrumentation</subject><subject>Neurosurgery</subject><subject>Plasma Substitutes</subject><subject>Pulmonary Artery - physiology</subject><subject>Pulmonary Wedge Pressure - physiology</subject><subject>Reference Standards</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Stroke</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><issn>0898-4921</issn><issn>1537-1921</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kcFuFDEMhiMEotvCGyCUG1ymTTKbSXJctVCQKnpo4TpyEk8JmpkMSaZiH4c3JVULSD30YNmSP_-2_BPyhrNjzow62X3ZHTPLeIst1xy3XBjzjGy4bFXDjeDPyYZpo5ttrQ_IYc4_GGNGSPWSHAjWCdFpuSG_v8EYfCh7Gge6rGNGuiTMeU1IYfY073OJY3DUjjH6_71bSAFKiDP1UIBGWyDM6OmQ4kSBnkHBX_Ty-4Qe6NWJpFOcQ4mJDjWqiA-uhPmGDuMaPK2iS5xzuMW5ylO_prte3XODaf-KvBig3vX6IR-Rrx8_XJ9-ai4uzz-f7i4a17amNAal1V47JmHLLCDK1gvlvQQvLCrVOYndYFABWFP_x6xTzGitnTIA3rZH5N297pLizxVz6aeQHY4jzBjX3Cspue66Tlby_ZMkZ5wLrowyFd3eoy7FnBMO_ZLCBGlfof7Oxr7a2D-2sY69fdiw2vrCf0N_fWv_AC0qngA</recordid><startdate>201010</startdate><enddate>201010</enddate><creator>Qiao, Hui</creator><creator>Zhang, Jun</creator><creator>Liang, Wei-min</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201010</creationdate><title>Validity of pulse pressure and systolic blood pressure variation data obtained from a Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness during surgery</title><author>Qiao, Hui ; Zhang, Jun ; Liang, Wei-min</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-9e5b8d8c05a40baee53d27dd5ad2be776c5e6f9e7aab90970bc709888c79aadb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anesthesia, General</topic><topic>Area Under Curve</topic><topic>Blood pressure</topic><topic>Blood Pressure - physiology</topic><topic>Central Venous Pressure - physiology</topic><topic>Craniotomy</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fluid Therapy</topic><topic>Hemodynamics - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives</topic><topic>Infusion fluids</topic><topic>Intraoperative Period</topic><topic>Likelihood Functions</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Monitoring, Intraoperative - instrumentation</topic><topic>Neurosurgery</topic><topic>Plasma Substitutes</topic><topic>Pulmonary Artery - physiology</topic><topic>Pulmonary Wedge Pressure - physiology</topic><topic>Reference Standards</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Stroke</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Qiao, Hui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liang, Wei-min</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Qiao, Hui</au><au>Zhang, Jun</au><au>Liang, Wei-min</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validity of pulse pressure and systolic blood pressure variation data obtained from a Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness during surgery</atitle><jtitle>Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology</jtitle><addtitle>J Neurosurg Anesthesiol</addtitle><date>2010-10</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>316</spage><epage>322</epage><pages>316-322</pages><issn>0898-4921</issn><eissn>1537-1921</eissn><abstract>A simple, inexpensive method is needed for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients during surgery. A previously described method using the Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor to record arterial and pulse pressure might be accurate enough to use for this purpose.
In this study, 26 patients undergoing scheduled craniotomy surgery, we compared measurement of systolic pressure variation (SPV) (measured as both mm Hg and %) and pulse pressure variation (PPV%) using the Ohmeda monitor method to simultaneously measurement of a reference standard, stroke volume variation (SVV) determined with an Edwards FloTrac/Vigileo monitor, during volume loading.
Variation in systolic pressure, pulse pressure, and stroke volume all decreased proportionally as fluid volume increased. The 3 test parameters, SPV (%), SPV (mm Hg), and PPV (%) were highly correlated to SVV, the reference standard. Bland-Altman plots comparing SPV (%) and PPV with SVV showed agreement with this standard. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed no significant difference between the 3 test parameters for predicting the vascular response to fluid infusion.
There were no significant differences between SPV and PPV estimation using the Ohmeda monitor method and the reference SVV measurement for predicting vascular changes in response to fluid loading. The Ohmeda monitor method requires less sophisticated technology and is much less expensive than other methods.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>20622685</pmid><doi>10.1097/ANA.0b013e3181e41299</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0898-4921 |
ispartof | Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology, 2010-10, Vol.22 (4), p.316-322 |
issn | 0898-4921 1537-1921 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_755186665 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Adult Anesthesia, General Area Under Curve Blood pressure Blood Pressure - physiology Central Venous Pressure - physiology Craniotomy Data processing Female Fluid Therapy Hemodynamics - physiology Humans Hydroxyethyl Starch Derivatives Infusion fluids Intraoperative Period Likelihood Functions Male Middle Aged Monitoring, Intraoperative - instrumentation Neurosurgery Plasma Substitutes Pulmonary Artery - physiology Pulmonary Wedge Pressure - physiology Reference Standards ROC Curve Stroke Surgery |
title | Validity of pulse pressure and systolic blood pressure variation data obtained from a Datex Ohmeda S/5 monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness during surgery |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T11%3A23%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validity%20of%20pulse%20pressure%20and%20systolic%20blood%20pressure%20variation%20data%20obtained%20from%20a%20Datex%20Ohmeda%20S/5%20monitor%20for%20predicting%20fluid%20responsiveness%20during%20surgery&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20neurosurgical%20anesthesiology&rft.au=Qiao,%20Hui&rft.date=2010-10&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=316&rft.epage=322&rft.pages=316-322&rft.issn=0898-4921&rft.eissn=1537-1921&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/ANA.0b013e3181e41299&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E755186665%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1011217979&rft_id=info:pmid/20622685&rfr_iscdi=true |