Login / Signup

Simultaneous Venous-Arterial Doppler Ultrasound During Early Fluid Resuscitation to Characterize a Novel Doppler Starling Curve: A Prospective Observational Pilot Study.

Jon-Émile Stuart KennyRoss PragerPhilippe RolaKorbin HaycockStanley O GibbsDelaney H JohnstonChristine HornerJoseph K EiblVivian C LauBenjamin O Kemp
Published in: Journal of intensive care medicine (2024)
Background: The likelihood of a patient being preload responsive-a state where the cardiac output or stroke volume (SV) increases significantly in response to preload-depends on both cardiac filling and function. This relationship is described by the canonical Frank-Starling curve. Research Question : We hypothesize that a novel method for phenotyping hypoperfused patients (ie, the "Doppler Starling curve") using synchronously measured jugular venous Doppler as a marker of central venous pressure (CVP) and corrected flow time of the carotid artery (ccFT) as a surrogate for SV will refine the pretest probability of preload responsiveness/unresponsiveness. Study Design and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a prospectively collected convenience sample of hypoperfused adult emergency department (ED) patients. Doppler measurements were obtained before and during a preload challenge using a wireless, wearable Doppler ultrasound system. Based on internal jugular and carotid artery Doppler surrogates of CVP and SV, respectively, we placed hemodynamic assessments into quadrants (Q x ) prior to preload augmentation: low CVP with normal SV (Q 1 ), high CVP and normal SV (Q 2 ), low CVP and low SV (Q 3 ) and high CVP and low SV (Q 4 ). The proportion of preload responsive and unresponsive assessments in each quadrant was calculated based on the maximal change in ccFT (ccFT Δ ) during either a passive leg raise or rapid fluid challenge. Results: We analyzed 41 patients (68 hemodynamic assessments) between February and April 2021. The prevalence of each phenotype was: 15 (22%) in Q 1 , 8 (12%) in Q 2 , 39 (57%) in Q 3 , and 6 (9%) in Q 4 . Preload unresponsiveness rates were: Q 1 , 20%; Q 2 , 50%; Q 3 , 33%, and Q 4 , 67%. Interpretation: Even fluid naïve ED patients with sonographic estimates of low CVP have high rates of fluid unresponsiveness, making dynamic testing valuable to prevent ineffective IVF administration.
Keyphrases