Assessment of volume responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients

Abstract

Monitoring and management of intravascular volume status is of crucial importance in critically ill patients. Hypovolemia, induced by hemorrhage or pathologic fluid shifts in the presence of systemic inflammation, is frequently the cause for hemodynamic instability and hypotension. This deficit of central blood volume leads to a reduction in biventricular cardiac preload. With respect to the Frank-Starling mechanism, this causes an alteration in left ventricular stroke volume. If this reduction in stroke volume cannot be compensated by an increase in heart rate, this finally results in a decline of cardiac output. In this clinical situation fluid loading is the treatment of choice. However, insufficient peripheral vascular resistance and thus reduced cardiac afterload as well as impaired myocardial contractility also have to be taken in account to be causative for hypotension. Potential hazards of fluid loading specifically in the latter situation include pulmonary edema, worsening of pulmonary gas exchange and myocardial failure. Thus, prediction of fluid responsiveness, i.e. the prediction of the hemodynamic response to fluid loading is of utmost importance in critically ill patients. Several conventional parameters of systemic hemodynamic monitoring such as the cardiac filling pressures CVP and PAOP, the estimation of the left ventricular end-diastolic area (LVEDA) by echocardiography and measurement of central blood volumes as the right-ventricular end-diastolic volume (RVEDV) or the global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) by thermodilution are frequently used for preload monitoring. Further, functional preload parameters such as the left ventricular stroke volume variation (SW), describing the specific interactions of the heart and the lungs under mechanical ventilation, have been recently proposed to be useful for predicting fluid responsiveness. Thus, it is the aim of the present article to analyze these different concepts of hemodynamic monitoring regarding their usefulness and clinical applicability to predict fluid responsiveness at the bedside.