These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Correlation of Common Carotid Artery Blood Flow Parameters With Transthoracic Echocardiographic Cardiac Output for Assessing Fluid Responsiveness After Passive Leg Raising (PLR) Test in Critically Ill Patients.
    Author: Patnaik R, Krishna B, Sampath S.
    Journal: Cureus; 2023 Jun; 15(6):e40229. PubMed ID: 37435241.
    Abstract:
    Introduction The passive leg raising (PLR) test is a simple, non-invasive method of knowing fluid responsiveness by acting as an internal-fluid challenge. The PLR test coupled with a non-invasive assessment of stroke volume would be the ideal method to assess fluid responsiveness. This study aimed to determine the correlation between transthoracic echocardiographic cardiac output (TTE-CO) and common carotid artery blood flow (CCABF) parameters in determining fluid responsiveness with the PLR test. Methods  We performed a prospective observational study on 40 critically ill patients. Patients were evaluated with a 7-13 MHz linear transducer probe for CCABF parameters calculated using time-averaged mean velocity (TAmean) and with a 1-5 MHz cardiac probe equipped with tissue doppler imaging (TDI) for TTE-CO calculated using left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT VTI) with an apical five-chamber view. Two separate PLR tests (five minutes apart) were done within 48 hours of ICU admission. The first PLR test was to assess the effects on TTE-CO. The second PLR test was performed to assess the effects on CCABF parameters. Patients were designated as fluid responders (FR) if changes in TTE-CO (Δ TTE-CO) ≥ 10 %. Results  A positive PLR test was observed in 33% of patients. A strong correlation was present between absolute values of TTE-CO calculated using LVOT VTI and the absolute values of CCABF calculated using TAmean (r=0.60, p<0.05). However, a weak correlation was found between Δ TTE-CO and changes in CCABF (Δ CCABF) during the PLR test (r=0.05, p<0.74). A positive PLR test response could not be detected by Δ CCABF (area under the curve (AUC): 0.59 ± 0.09). Conclusions We found a moderate correlation between TTE-CO and CCABF at baseline. However, Δ TTE-CO had a very poor correlation with Δ CCABF, during the PLR test. Considering this, CCABF parameters may not be recommended as a means to detect fluid responsiveness with PLR tests in critically ill patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]