Assessment of Pericardium Volume by the Stroke Volume Variation in Patients with Off-Pump Cardiac Surgery

DOI: 10.4236/ojanes.2013.33047   PDF   HTML     2,912 Downloads   4,512 Views   Citations


Objective: SVV is derived from the cardiopulmonary interaction, which is used to predict the responsiveness of cardiac preload guiding fluid therapy in patients under general anesthesia in non-opened chest surgery. From a clinical point of view, it is important to know how well SVV reflects preload and fluid responsiveness during cardiac surgery. This study was undertaken to assess the accuracy and reliability of SVV derived from the FloTrac/Vigileo system in monitoring changes in blood volume in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) under general anesthesia. Methods: After approval from the ethics committee and obtaining the permission of the patients, twenty-nine patients, ASA II-III and NYHA II-III, aged 44-7 yr, undergoing elective off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting, were randomly divided into 2 groups: the control group (group C, n = 8) and volume expansion group (group V, n = 21). After patients entered the operating room, veins were put in line, ECG, HR, SpO2, and PETCO2 were continuously monitored. Left radial arterial and right internal jugular vein catheters were inserted under local anesthesia. The FloTracTM/VigileoTM system was connected and MAP, CO, CI, SVV, SV, SVI, SVR, SVRI, CVP were continuously monitored. BIS values were kept at 45%-55.6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 sodium chloride solution 7 ml/kg was intravenously infused after completion of sternotomy and pericardiotomy at a rate of 0.25 ml/kg–1/min–1 in group V. MAP, HR, CVP, systemic vascular resistance (SVR), SVV, and stroke volume index (SVI) were determined 10 min before (T1) and after the infusion of finished (T2), and the change rate (ΔHR, ΔMAP, ΔCVP, ΔSVR, ΔSVV, ΔSVI) was calculated. Sodium chloride injection 3 ml/kg was infused in group C. Results: CVP, SVI, CO and CI were increased after volume expansion, SVRI and SVV significantly decreased in group V(P < 0.01), while MAP and HR were not changed. Changes in HR(r = –0.737, P < 0.05) and SVR(r = –0.480, P < 0.05) were significantly correlated to changes in SVI, but there was no correlation between ΔCVP, ΔMAP, ΔSVV and ΔSVI. SVV(

Share and Cite:

C. Dai, G. Dai, Y. Wang and M. Liu, "Assessment of Pericardium Volume by the Stroke Volume Variation in Patients with Off-Pump Cardiac Surgery," Open Journal of Anesthesiology, Vol. 3 No. 3, 2013, pp. 201-206. doi: 10.4236/ojanes.2013.33047.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] D. Osman, C. Ridel, P. Ray, et al., “Cardiac Filling Pressures Are Not Appropriate to Predict Hemodynamic Response to Volume Challenge,” Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2007, pp. 64-68. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000249851.94101.4F
[2] K. Bendjelid and J. A. Romand, “Fluid Responsiveness in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Review of Indices Used in Intensive Care,” Intensive Care Medicine, Vol. 29, No. 8, 2003, pp. 352-360. doi:10.1007/s00134-003-1777-0
[3] C. K. Hofer, A. Senn, L. Weibel, et al., “Assessment of Stroke Volume Variation for Prediction of Fluid Responsiveness Using the Modified FloTrac™ and PiCCOplus™ System,” Critical Care, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2008, p. R82. doi:10.1186/cc6933
[4] M. Cannesson, H. Musard, O. Desebbe, et al., “The Ability of Stroke Volume Variations Obtained with Vigileo/ FloTrac System to Monitor Fluid Responsiveness in Mechanically Ventilated Patients,” Anesthesia & Analgesia, Vol. 108, No. 2, 2009, pp. 513-517. doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e318192a36b
[5] P. E. Marik, R. Cavallazzi, T. Vasu and A. Hirani, “Dynamic Changes in Arterial Waveform Derived Variables and Fluid Responsiveness in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature,” Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 37, No. 9, 2009, pp. 2642-2647. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a590da
[6] D. A. Reuter, M. S. G. Goepfert, T. Goresch, et al., “Assessing Fluid Responsiveness during Open Chest Conditions,” British Journal of Anaesthesia, Vol. 94, No. 3, 2005, pp. 318-323. doi:10.1093/bja/aei043
[7] P. A. Wyffels, P. Sergeant and P. F. Wouters, “The Value of Pulse Pressure and Stroke Volume Variation as Predictors of Fluid Responsiveness during Open Chest Surgery,” Anaesthesia, Vol. 65, No. 7, 2010, pp. 704-709. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06371.x
[8] S. Rex, G. Schälte, S. Schroth, et al., “Limitations of Arterial Pulse Pressure Variation and Left Ventricular Stroke Volume Variation in Estimating Cardiac Pre-Load during Open Heart Surgery,” Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, Vol. 51, No. 9, 2007, pp. 1258-1267.
[9] C. P. Tousignant, F. Walsh and C. D. Mazer, “The Use of Transesophageal Echocardiography for Preload Assessment in Critically Ill Patients,” Anesthesia & Analgesia, Vol. 90, No. 2, 2000, pp. 351-355.
[10] F. Michard and J. L. Teboul, “Predicting Fluid Responsiveness in ICU Patients: A Critical Analysis of the Evidence,” Chest, Vol. 121, No. 6, 2002, pp. 2000-2008. doi:10.1378/chest.121.6.2000
[11] M. Sander, C. D. Spies, K. Berger, et al., “Prediction of Volume Response under Open-Chest Conditions during Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery,” Critical Care, Vol. 11, No. 6, 2007, p. R121. doi:10.1186/cc6181
[12] L. Belloni, A. Pisano, A. Natale, et al., “Assessment of Fluid-Responsiveness Parameters for Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: A Comparison among LiDCO, Transesophageal Echochardiography, and Pulmonary Artery Catheter,” Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2008, pp. 243-248. doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2007.07.007
[13] C. K. Hofer, S. M. Müller and L. Furrer, et al., “Stroke Volume and Pulse Pressure Variation for Prediction of Fluid Responsiveness in Patients Undergoing Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting,” Chest, Vol. 128, No. 2, 2005, pp. 848-854. doi:10.1378/chest.128.2.848
[14] C. Barbier, Y. Loubieres, C. Schmit, et al., “Respiratory Changes in Inferior Vena Cava Diameter Are Helpful in Predicting Fluid Responsiveness in Ventilated Septic Patients,” Intensive Care Medicine, Vol. 30, No. 9, 2004, pp. 1740-1746. doi:10.1007/s00134-004-2259-8
[15] W. P. Santamore and J. N. Amoore, “Buffering of Respiratory Variations in Venous Return by Right Ventricle: A Theoretical Analysis,” American Journal of Physiology, Vol. 267, No. 6, 1994, pp. H2163-H2170.
[16] J. A. Shaver, P. S. Reddy, E. I. Curtiss, et al., “Noninvasive/Invasive Correlates of Exaggerated Ventricular Interdependence in Cardiac Tamponade,” Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 37, No. S1, 2001, pp. 71-76.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.