Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 4/2022

08-09-2021 | Original Research

Pharmacodynamic analysis of a fluid challenge with 4 ml kg−1 over 10 or 20 min: a multicenter cross-over randomized clinical trial

Authors: Antonio Messina, Chiara Palandri, Silvia De Rosa, Vinicio Danzi, Efrem Bonaldi, Claudia Montagnini, Sara Baino, Federico Villa, Francesca Sala, Paola Zito, Katerina Negri, Francesco Della Corte, Gianmaria Cammarota, Laura Saderi, Giovanni Sotgiu, Manuel Ignacio Monge García, Maurizio Cecconi

Published in: Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing | Issue 4/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

A number of studies performed in the operating room evaluated the hemodynamic effects of the fluid challenge (FC), solely considering the effect before and after the infusion. Few studies have investigated the pharmacodynamic effect of the FC on hemodynamic flow and pressure variables. We designed this trial aiming at describing the pharmacodynamic profile of two different FC infusion times, of a fixed dose of 4 ml kg−1.

Methods

Forty-nine elective neurosurgical patients received two consecutive FCs of 4 ml kg−1 of crystalloids in 10 (FC10) or 20 (FC20) minutes, in a random order. Fluid responsiveness was defined as stroke volume index increase ≥ 10%. We assessed the net area under the curve (AUC), the maximal percentage difference from baseline (dmax), time when the dmax was observed (tmax), change from baseline at 1-min (d1) and 5-min (d5) after FC end.

Results

After FC10 and FC20, 25 (51%) and 14 (29%) of 49 patients were classified as fluid responders (p = 0.001). With the exception of the AUCs of SAP and MAP, the AUCs of all the considered hemodynamic variables were comparable. The dmax and the tmax were overall comparable. In both groups, the hemodynamic effects on flow variables were dissipated within 5 min after FC end.

Conclusions

The infusion time of FC administration affects fluid responsiveness, being higher for FC10 as compared to FC20. The effect on flow variables of either FCs fades 5 min after the end of infusion.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
25.
go back to reference Wang H, Chow S-C. Sample size calculation for comparing proportions. In: D’Agostino RB, Sullivan L, Massaro J, editors. Wiley Encyclopedia of clinical trials. Hoboken: Wiley; 2007. Wang H, Chow S-C. Sample size calculation for comparing proportions. In: D’Agostino RB, Sullivan L, Massaro J, editors. Wiley Encyclopedia of clinical trials. Hoboken: Wiley; 2007.
32.
go back to reference Guyton AC, Jones CE. Central venous pressure: physiological significance and clinical implications. Am Heart J. 1973;86(4):431–7.CrossRef Guyton AC, Jones CE. Central venous pressure: physiological significance and clinical implications. Am Heart J. 1973;86(4):431–7.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Guyton AC, Richardson TQ, Langston JB. Regulation of cardiac output and venous return. Clin Anesth. 1964;3:1–34.PubMed Guyton AC, Richardson TQ, Langston JB. Regulation of cardiac output and venous return. Clin Anesth. 1964;3:1–34.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Pharmacodynamic analysis of a fluid challenge with 4 ml kg−1 over 10 or 20 min: a multicenter cross-over randomized clinical trial
Authors
Antonio Messina
Chiara Palandri
Silvia De Rosa
Vinicio Danzi
Efrem Bonaldi
Claudia Montagnini
Sara Baino
Federico Villa
Francesca Sala
Paola Zito
Katerina Negri
Francesco Della Corte
Gianmaria Cammarota
Laura Saderi
Giovanni Sotgiu
Manuel Ignacio Monge García
Maurizio Cecconi
Publication date
08-09-2021
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing / Issue 4/2022
Print ISSN: 1387-1307
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2614
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-021-00756-3

Other articles of this Issue 4/2022

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 4/2022 Go to the issue