A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation

Introduction: Optimal intraoperative fluid management guided by central venous pressure (CVP), a traditional intravascular volume status indicator, has improved transplanted graft function during kidney transplantation (KT). Pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume variation (SVV) – dynamic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kyung Mi Kim, Gaab Soo Kim, Minsoo Han
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer – Medknow Publications 2022-12-01
Series:Singapore Medical Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.lww.com/10.11622/smedj.2021221
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1823861066465017856
author Kyung Mi Kim
Gaab Soo Kim
Minsoo Han
author_facet Kyung Mi Kim
Gaab Soo Kim
Minsoo Han
author_sort Kyung Mi Kim
collection DOAJ
description Introduction: Optimal intraoperative fluid management guided by central venous pressure (CVP), a traditional intravascular volume status indicator, has improved transplanted graft function during kidney transplantation (KT). Pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume variation (SVV) – dynamic preload indexes – are robust predictors of fluid responsiveness. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of PPV and CVP against SVV in predicting fluid responsiveness in terms of cost-effectiveness after a standardised empiric volume challenge in KT patients. Methods: 36 patients undergoing living-donor KT were analysed. PPV, SVV, CVP and cardiac index (CI) were measured before and after fluid loading with a hydroxyethyl starch solution (7 mL/kg of ideal body weight). Patients were classified as responders (n = 12) or non-responders (n = 24) to fluid loading when CI increases were ≥10% or <10%, respectively. The ability of PPV, SVV and CVP to predict fluid responsiveness was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: SVV and CVP measured before fluid loading were correlated with changes in CI caused by fluid expansion (r = 0.33, P = 0.049 and r = −0.37, P = 0.026) in contrast to PPV (r = 0.14, P = 0.429). The ROC analysis showed that SVV and CVP predicted response to volume loading (area under the ROC curve = 0.781 and 0.727, respectively; P < 0.05). Conclusion: Under the conditions of our study, SVV and CVP exhibited similar performance in predicting fluid responsiveness and could inform fluid management during KT as compared with PPV.
format Article
id doaj-art-de145c89ec4942c293dc322cc1d86e6c
institution Kabale University
issn 0037-5675
2737-5935
language English
publishDate 2022-12-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer – Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Singapore Medical Journal
spelling doaj-art-de145c89ec4942c293dc322cc1d86e6c2025-02-10T05:49:10ZengWolters Kluwer – Medknow PublicationsSingapore Medical Journal0037-56752737-59352022-12-01631273173910.11622/smedj.2021221A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantationKyung Mi KimGaab Soo KimMinsoo HanIntroduction: Optimal intraoperative fluid management guided by central venous pressure (CVP), a traditional intravascular volume status indicator, has improved transplanted graft function during kidney transplantation (KT). Pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume variation (SVV) – dynamic preload indexes – are robust predictors of fluid responsiveness. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of PPV and CVP against SVV in predicting fluid responsiveness in terms of cost-effectiveness after a standardised empiric volume challenge in KT patients. Methods: 36 patients undergoing living-donor KT were analysed. PPV, SVV, CVP and cardiac index (CI) were measured before and after fluid loading with a hydroxyethyl starch solution (7 mL/kg of ideal body weight). Patients were classified as responders (n = 12) or non-responders (n = 24) to fluid loading when CI increases were ≥10% or <10%, respectively. The ability of PPV, SVV and CVP to predict fluid responsiveness was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: SVV and CVP measured before fluid loading were correlated with changes in CI caused by fluid expansion (r = 0.33, P = 0.049 and r = −0.37, P = 0.026) in contrast to PPV (r = 0.14, P = 0.429). The ROC analysis showed that SVV and CVP predicted response to volume loading (area under the ROC curve = 0.781 and 0.727, respectively; P < 0.05). Conclusion: Under the conditions of our study, SVV and CVP exhibited similar performance in predicting fluid responsiveness and could inform fluid management during KT as compared with PPV.https://journals.lww.com/10.11622/smedj.2021221central venous pressurefluid therapykidney transplantationpulse pressure variationstroke volume variation
spellingShingle Kyung Mi Kim
Gaab Soo Kim
Minsoo Han
A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
Singapore Medical Journal
central venous pressure
fluid therapy
kidney transplantation
pulse pressure variation
stroke volume variation
title A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
title_full A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
title_fullStr A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
title_short A comparative study of pulse pressure variation, stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
title_sort comparative study of pulse pressure variation stroke volume variation and central venous pressure in patients undergoing kidney transplantation
topic central venous pressure
fluid therapy
kidney transplantation
pulse pressure variation
stroke volume variation
url https://journals.lww.com/10.11622/smedj.2021221
work_keys_str_mv AT kyungmikim acomparativestudyofpulsepressurevariationstrokevolumevariationandcentralvenouspressureinpatientsundergoingkidneytransplantation
AT gaabsookim acomparativestudyofpulsepressurevariationstrokevolumevariationandcentralvenouspressureinpatientsundergoingkidneytransplantation
AT minsoohan acomparativestudyofpulsepressurevariationstrokevolumevariationandcentralvenouspressureinpatientsundergoingkidneytransplantation
AT kyungmikim comparativestudyofpulsepressurevariationstrokevolumevariationandcentralvenouspressureinpatientsundergoingkidneytransplantation
AT gaabsookim comparativestudyofpulsepressurevariationstrokevolumevariationandcentralvenouspressureinpatientsundergoingkidneytransplantation
AT minsoohan comparativestudyofpulsepressurevariationstrokevolumevariationandcentralvenouspressureinpatientsundergoingkidneytransplantation