Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study
The peak velocity variation within the carotid artery (ΔVpeakCCA) and left ventricular outflow tract (ΔVpeakLVOT) is derived from the pulsed wave Doppler waveform and may predict fluid responsiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate ΔVpeakCCA and ΔVpeakLVOT against calibrated stroke volume var...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2023-06-01
|
| Series: | WFUMB Ultrasound Open |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668323000010 |
| _version_ | 1797237929219719168 |
|---|---|
| author | Joris van Houte Esmée C. de Boer Luuk van Knippenberg Irene Suriani Michaël I. Meesters Loek P.B. Meijs Leon J. Montenij Arthur R. Bouwman |
| author_facet | Joris van Houte Esmée C. de Boer Luuk van Knippenberg Irene Suriani Michaël I. Meesters Loek P.B. Meijs Leon J. Montenij Arthur R. Bouwman |
| author_sort | Joris van Houte |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The peak velocity variation within the carotid artery (ΔVpeakCCA) and left ventricular outflow tract (ΔVpeakLVOT) is derived from the pulsed wave Doppler waveform and may predict fluid responsiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate ΔVpeakCCA and ΔVpeakLVOT against calibrated stroke volume variation (SVV) and pulse pressure variation (PVV). Therefore, eighteen cardiac surgery patients were included in this prospective observational study. Doppler measurements were performed after induction of anesthesia, after a passive leg raise, and at the end of surgery. Simultaneously, SVV and PPV were measured by pulse-contour-analysis (PiCCO). The correlation, methodological agreement, concordance, and clinical agreement between Doppler and PiCCO measurements were assessed. The correlation between SVV and ΔVpeakCCA was strong (ρ = 0.88). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a bias of 0.01%, and LOA +/− 4.6%, acceptable concordance (93%), and close to acceptable clinical agreement (88%). For PPV and ΔVpeakCCA correlation was also strong (ρ = 0.73), bias was −0.2%, LOA +/− 7.6%, with intermediate acceptable concordance (90%), and low clinical agreement (72%). Analysis of ΔVpeakLVOT measurements demonstrated poor statistical agreement with SVV and PPV. In conclusion, in cardiac surgery patients ΔVpeakCCA, as opposed to ΔVpeakLVOT, has acceptable statistical and clinical agreement with SVV measurements. ΔVpeakCCA may qualify as a potential tool for non-invasive assessment of fluid responsiveness. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T17:27:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f7c9d7a40d844851b8574a588f0f1d57 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2949-6683 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T17:27:33Z |
| publishDate | 2023-06-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | WFUMB Ultrasound Open |
| spelling | doaj.art-f7c9d7a40d844851b8574a588f0f1d572024-03-28T06:39:43ZengElsevierWFUMB Ultrasound Open2949-66832023-06-0111100001Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison studyJoris van Houte0Esmée C. de Boer1Luuk van Knippenberg2Irene Suriani3Michaël I. Meesters4Loek P.B. Meijs5Leon J. Montenij6Arthur R. Bouwman7Department of Anesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Corresponding author. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Catharina Hospital, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsDepartment of Anesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsDepartment of Intensive Care, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the NetherlandsDepartment of Anesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Department of Intensive Care, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsDepartment of Anesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsThe peak velocity variation within the carotid artery (ΔVpeakCCA) and left ventricular outflow tract (ΔVpeakLVOT) is derived from the pulsed wave Doppler waveform and may predict fluid responsiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate ΔVpeakCCA and ΔVpeakLVOT against calibrated stroke volume variation (SVV) and pulse pressure variation (PVV). Therefore, eighteen cardiac surgery patients were included in this prospective observational study. Doppler measurements were performed after induction of anesthesia, after a passive leg raise, and at the end of surgery. Simultaneously, SVV and PPV were measured by pulse-contour-analysis (PiCCO). The correlation, methodological agreement, concordance, and clinical agreement between Doppler and PiCCO measurements were assessed. The correlation between SVV and ΔVpeakCCA was strong (ρ = 0.88). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a bias of 0.01%, and LOA +/− 4.6%, acceptable concordance (93%), and close to acceptable clinical agreement (88%). For PPV and ΔVpeakCCA correlation was also strong (ρ = 0.73), bias was −0.2%, LOA +/− 7.6%, with intermediate acceptable concordance (90%), and low clinical agreement (72%). Analysis of ΔVpeakLVOT measurements demonstrated poor statistical agreement with SVV and PPV. In conclusion, in cardiac surgery patients ΔVpeakCCA, as opposed to ΔVpeakLVOT, has acceptable statistical and clinical agreement with SVV measurements. ΔVpeakCCA may qualify as a potential tool for non-invasive assessment of fluid responsiveness.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668323000010Peak velocity variationCarotid Doppler ultrasoundStroke volume variationPulse pressure variationLeft ventricular outflow tractPassive leg raise |
| spellingShingle | Joris van Houte Esmée C. de Boer Luuk van Knippenberg Irene Suriani Michaël I. Meesters Loek P.B. Meijs Leon J. Montenij Arthur R. Bouwman Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study WFUMB Ultrasound Open Peak velocity variation Carotid Doppler ultrasound Stroke volume variation Pulse pressure variation Left ventricular outflow tract Passive leg raise |
| title | Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study |
| title_full | Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study |
| title_fullStr | Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study |
| title_short | Evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation: a method comparison study |
| title_sort | evaluating carotid and aortic peak velocity variation as an alternative index for stroke volume and pulse pressure variation a method comparison study |
| topic | Peak velocity variation Carotid Doppler ultrasound Stroke volume variation Pulse pressure variation Left ventricular outflow tract Passive leg raise |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668323000010 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jorisvanhoute evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT esmeecdeboer evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT luukvanknippenberg evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT irenesuriani evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT michaelimeesters evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT loekpbmeijs evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT leonjmontenij evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy AT arthurrbouwman evaluatingcarotidandaorticpeakvelocityvariationasanalternativeindexforstrokevolumeandpulsepressurevariationamethodcomparisonstudy |