Upload
oliver-flower
View
1.184
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Conquer the random number generator. Lawrence Weinberg's guide to modern haemodynamic monitoring devices.
Citation preview
Haemodynamic Optimisation
Riding the Wave
Dr Laurence WeinbergAnaesthetist, Department of Anaesthesia, Austin Hospital
Senior Fellow, Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne
Declarations• Edwards Lifesciences Fluid Advisory Board• Baxter National Fluid Advisory Board• Pancare Foundation Scientific Board
“We need to understand our own outcomes before we can
make a difference”George Bernard Shaw
44
55
“Austin,You've Got a Problem”
6
Haemodynamic truth
?
Diagnostic and Haemodynamic Monitoring tools
NOT Therapeutic Interventions
“No DEVICE can improve patient-centered outcomes UNLESS
it is coupled to a treatment that improves outcome”
Modified from M. Pinsky, J.L. Vincent
10
Treatments save lives NOT
Monitors
BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
v
21
22
23
24
25
• All patients ERAS; n= 65Hypothesis• ?SS-GDT + ERAS vs. ERAS alone
26
ERAS only (n=50) SS-DGT + ERAS (n=15) P-value
ASA, Age, Comorbidities NS
Duration Sx (median) 6.5 hours 8.0 hours 0.001
Intra-operative IV fluids (median) 4250 ml 3000 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 1 (median) 1363 ml 1418 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 2 (median) 278 ml 353 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 3 (median) 100 ml 170 ml NS
Length of stay (median) 10 days (IQR: 7-14) 10 days (IQR: 9-13) NS
Mann-Whitney test
27
ERAS only (n=50) SS-DGT + ERAS (n=15) P-value
ASA, Age, Comorbidities NS
Duration Sx (median) 6.5 hours 8.0 hours 0.001
Intra-operative IV fluids (median) 4250 ml 3000 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 1 (median) 1363 ml 1418 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 2 (median) 278 ml 353 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 3 (median) 100 ml 170 ml NS
Length of stay (median) 10 days (IQR: 7-14) 10 days (IQR: 9-13) NS
Mann-Whitney test
28
ERAS only (n=50) SS-DGT + ERAS (n=15) P-value
ASA, Age, Comorbidities NS
Duration Sx (median) 6.5 hours 8.0 hours 0.001
Intra-operative IV fluids (median) 4250 ml 3000 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 1 (median) 1363 ml 1418 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 2 (median) 278 ml 353 ml NS
Fluid balance Day 3 (median) 100 ml 170 ml NS
Length of stay (median) 10 days (IQR: 7-14) 10 days (IQR: 9-13) NS
Mann-Whitney test
Complications
29
Complics No Complics0
1020304050607080
GDT + ERASERAS
P = 0.0295% CI: 1.3 to 16OR: 4.5
% of patients
How do we use the information from the
device?
Optimize outcomes“Goal Directed Therapy" setting a haemodynamic goal
and fitting the patient to the goal
Who is having a specific operation!!!
“Haemodynamic Optimisation" i.e. looking at the patient and fitting the goal to the patient
Purpose AHDM
• Assess circulatory performance• Determine if CO is consistent with keeping
tissue O2 demand
AND IF NOT……………….
Purpose AHDM
To determine what components of the haemodynamic profile need to adjusted
to re-establish consumption-demand balance
Pinsky & Payen. Functional haemodynamic monitoring, 2004; 1-4Pinsky & Payen, Crit Care 2005; 9: 566
Haemodynamic truth
35
Restoration of MAP may not restore microcirculation
i.e. Pressure is NOT flow
Pressure ≠ Flow
Haemodynamic truth
There is no normal cardiac output
37
• Adequate to meet the metabolic demands
• Inadequate to meet metabolic demands
AHDM: Proven OutcomesUsing a treatment protocol with haemodynamic monitoring (consistently) leads to improved clinical outcomes.
BUT WHAT PROTOCOL?
Two Goal Directed Protocol Philosophies
Give fluid, observe response, continue to give fluid and other therapies until target achieved
SV Max(Fluid First)
Haemodynamic Stability
(Observe First)Measure deterioration of clinical condition, titrate therapy using a variety of parameters
Variations:• Different “trigger” parameters: SVV, CO/CI,
DO2, SvO2 / ScvO2, CVP (declining)• Different philosophies on degree of treatment
Typical SV-Max ProtocolMonitor SV
SV increase > 10%
Monitor SV
250 ml fluid over 10 minutes
SV decrease > 10%Yes
BJA 2005; 5: 634-642
Is the patient haemodynamically stable?
Do Nothing Yes No
Is the patient preload-responsive?
Yes No Yes No
Volume bolusAdd Vasopressor
Volume bolus Add Vasopressor Add Inotrope
Yes No
Reassess the patient
Is the patient hypotensive and have reduced vasomotor tone?
Haemodynamic Stability Protocol
Haemodynamic Stability Protocol
Haemodynamic Stability Protocol
MAP
≥65 mmHg with NOR
And
<90 mmHg with nitrates
SVV
≤10 >10
CI<2.5 CI≥2.5
Dobu/Adr3
Or
nitrates
≤2 Fluidboluses1
SVV ≤ 10 SVV>10
Fluid2
ScvO2>70%
If not
Hgb>10
(Transusionof RBC)
Haemodynamic Stability Protocol
48
Major surgery
Prolonged surgery
Preload dependent optimization
concept
Increased cardiac function
Normal cardiac function
Decreased cardiac function
Preload
Frank-Starling Curve Stroke Volume Cardiac Output Cardiac Index Mixed Venous % Lactate TOE
Stro
ke
Volu
me
How to measure flow
IS THE PUMP
WORKING?
Stro
ke V
olum
e
Increased cardiac function
Normal cardiac function
Decreased cardiac function
Preload
Frank-Starling Curve
IS THE TANK FULL??
Str
ok
e V
olu
me
Increased cardiac function
Normal cardiac function
Decreased cardiac function
Preload
Frank-Starling Curve
1. An indication of fluid responsiveness
AND
2. A method of verifying that fluid is beneficial to the patient’s status
BOTH DIMENSIONS
ARE NECESSARY
TO OPTIMIZE FLUID
STATUS
120 mmHg
40 mmHg
Arterial Pressure
PPmax
PPmin
PPmax - PPmin
(PPmax + PPmin) /2∆PP =
Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000; 162:134-138
Threshold PPV > 13 %
PPV or SVV equals
Volume responsive
PPV or SVV equals
Give more fluid
?
Effects of vasoconstrictors on the heart? Raises left afterload -> decreases SV/CO? Releases blood from peripheral to central veins ->
increase CVP and CO
SV
SVPreload
Preload dependent
Phenylephrine increases preload
and therefore increases CO
SV
SVPreload
Preload independent
Phenylephrine No increase in
stroke volume. No increase in CO,
increase in afterload
ConclusionA threshold PPV value of 16.4% allowed discrimination between phenylephrine-
induced increase in SV and phenylephrine-induced decrease in SV
(94% sensitivity; 100% specificity).
Stroke Volume Variation in Hepatic Resection: A Replacement for Standard Central Venous PressureAnn Surg Oncol. 2013 Oct 23.
Results: 40 patients: CVP of -1 to 1 correlated to a SVV of 18-21 (R2 = 0.85, p < 0.001)
Conclusion: SVV safely as an alternative to CVP monitoring equivalent outcomes.
Surgical & Anaesthesia Goals During Major Liver Resection
Mobilisation & Control of inflow and outflow Resection Phase
Surgical - Blood loss from major hepatic veins or IVC- Pringle manoeuvre (total inflow occlusion of PV & HA) = decrease of CO
by 20-30% = CVS compromise- Total hepatic vascular occlusion (tumours close to IVC): occlusion
supra & infrahepatic IVC & hepatic pedicle = up to 60% decrease in CO
Anaesthesia considerations to reduce portal pressures• Fluid restriction• Reverse trendelenberg • Venodilatation• Venesection• Autologous normovolaemic haemodilution• Diuretics • Low CVP• Monitoring of CO or SvO2 to optimise oxygen delivery
65
SV Increases > 10%
Do nothing
MAP
Cardiac Index
Inodilator
Low Normal/High
<20% Baseline
VasoconstrictorB-Blocker /
antihypertensive/diuretic
High/Normal High/Normal
Cardiac Index
Inotrope
FLUID Challenge 250 mL
Within 20% baseline
> 20% baseline
Decrease /stop vasoconstrictorAdequate anaesthesia?Adequate analgesia?Adequate muscle relaxation?
Cardiac Index
Low
Inodilator/Vasodilator
Low
Yes
Assess volume responsiveness
Re-assess Volume Responsiveness
Optimal oxygen delivery?Heart rate optimized?Adequate oxygenation? Correct severe anaemia?Correct hypothermia?
Dissection & Liver Resection
- Fluid restriction- Reverse trendelenberg- Venodilatation to reduce hepatic pressure - Venesection & autologous haemodilution- Low PEEP- Low dose vasopressor
< 25% > 25%
67
Surgical & Anaesthesia Goals During Major Liver Resection
Confirmation of haemostasis & closure
Anaesthesia considerations - restoration of circulating blood volume• Return of autologous blood• Normalise CVP/SVV• Avoid hypervolaemia• Monitoring of CO or SvO2 to
optimise oxygen delivery
Surgical- Argon Beam to hepatic veins - Coagulation & fibrin glues- Haemostasis/control of bleeding
69
SV Increases > 10%
Do nothing
MAP
Cardiac Index
Inodilator
Low Normal/High
<20% Baseline
Vasoconstrictor
Optimal oxygen delivery?Heart rate optimized?Adequate oxygenation? Correct severe anaemia?Correct hypothermia?
B-Blocker / antihypertensive/di
uretic
High/Normal High/Normal
Cardiac Index
Inotrope
FLUID Challenge 250 mL
Within 20% baseline
> 20% baseline Decrease /stop vasoconstrictorAdequate anaesthesia?Adequate analgesia?Adequate muscle relaxation?
Cardiac Index
Low
Inodilator/Vasodilator
Low
> 20%< 20%
Yes
Major pancreatic surgery
Assess volume responsiveness
Re-assess Volume Responsiveness
74
• All patients ERAS; n= 129Hypothesis• SS-GDT + ERAS vs. ERAS alone
75
ERAS only (n=25) SS-GDT + ERAS (n=104) P-value
Resection volumes 375 g 450 g NS
Duration Sx (median) 4.3 hours 6.0 hours 0.0001
Intra-operative IV fluids (median) 3000 ml (1375-4000) 3000 ml (2000-3738) NS
Fluid balance Day 1 (median) 3000 ml (2200-4000) 3054 ml ( 2050-4133) NS
Length of stay (median) 6.6 days (IQR: 5.5-9) 7 days (IQR: 5.7-11) NS
76
ERAS only (n=25) SS-DGT + ERAS (n=104) P-value
Resection volumes 450 g 375 g 0.24
Duration Sx (median) 4.3 hours 6.0 hours 0.0001
Intra-operative IV fluids (median) 3000 ml (1375-4000) 3000 ml (2000-3738) NS
Fluid balance Day 1 (median) 3000 ml (2200-4000) 3054 ml ( 2050-4133) NS
Length of stay (median) 7 days (IQR: 5.7-11) 6.6 days (IQR: 5.5-9) NS
Complications
77
Complics No Complics0
1020304050607080
GDT + ERASERAS
P = 0.4795% CI: 0.2 to 1.7OR: 0.6
% of patients
78
79
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Stroke Volume Variation (%) - all patients
Time (standardised)
81
82
“The proposed algorithm of DGT induced some patients the additional
application of inotropes”Safety needs to be
clarified?
• 22 RCT’s reporting CVS complications• 2129 patients• DGT: reduction in CVS complications• Subgroup analysis (supra-normal DO2 : most
benefit from GDT83
84
“GDT better than liberal fluid therapy, but whether GDT is superior to a restrictive fluid
strategy remains uncertain”
85
86
87
Concluding thoughts• Consensus: advanced haemodynamic monitoring is better than not
monitoring• AHDM: diagnostic and haemodynamic monitoring tools: NOT
therapeutic interventions• Consensus: goals are needed!• Approaching consensus that protocols (reproducible care practices)
are better than no protocols, but still some dissenting opinions.• Individualize treatment for certain operations
Thank you