Cargando…
Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management?
Modalities of fluid management in patients sustaining the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are challenging and controversial. Optimal fluid management should provide adequate oxygen delivery to the body, while avoiding inadvertent increase in lung edema which further impairs gas exchange....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7652045/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33169217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06310-0 |
_version_ | 1783607624658321408 |
---|---|
author | Vignon, Philippe Evrard, Bruno Asfar, Pierre Busana, Mattia Calfee, Carolyn S. Coppola, Silvia Demiselle, Julien Geri, Guillaume Jozwiak, Mathieu Martin, Greg S. Gattinoni, Luciano Chiumello, Davide |
author_facet | Vignon, Philippe Evrard, Bruno Asfar, Pierre Busana, Mattia Calfee, Carolyn S. Coppola, Silvia Demiselle, Julien Geri, Guillaume Jozwiak, Mathieu Martin, Greg S. Gattinoni, Luciano Chiumello, Davide |
author_sort | Vignon, Philippe |
collection | PubMed |
description | Modalities of fluid management in patients sustaining the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are challenging and controversial. Optimal fluid management should provide adequate oxygen delivery to the body, while avoiding inadvertent increase in lung edema which further impairs gas exchange. In ARDS patients, positive fluid balance has been associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital stay, and higher mortality. Accordingly, a restrictive strategy has been compared to a more liberal approach in randomized controlled trials conducted in various clinical settings. Restrictive strategies included fluid restriction guided by the monitoring of extravascular lung water, pulmonary capillary wedge or central venous pressure, and furosemide targeted to diuresis and/or albumin replacement in hypoproteinemic patients. Overall, restrictive strategies improved oxygenation significantly and reduced duration of mechanical ventilation, but had no significant effect on mortality. Fluid management may require different approaches depending on the time course of ARDS (i.e., early vs. late period). The effects of fluid strategy management according to ARDS phenotypes remain to be evaluated. Since ARDS is frequently associated with sepsis-induced acute circulatory failure, the prediction of fluid responsiveness is crucial in these patients to avoid hemodynamically inefficient—hence respiratory detrimental—fluid administration. Specific hemodynamic indices of fluid responsiveness or mini-fluid challenges should be preferably used. Since the positive airway pressure contributes to positive fluid balance in ventilated ARDS patients, it should be kept as low as possible. As soon as the hemodynamic status is stabilized, correction of cumulated fluid retention may rely on diuretics administration or renal replacement therapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7652045 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76520452020-11-10 Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? Vignon, Philippe Evrard, Bruno Asfar, Pierre Busana, Mattia Calfee, Carolyn S. Coppola, Silvia Demiselle, Julien Geri, Guillaume Jozwiak, Mathieu Martin, Greg S. Gattinoni, Luciano Chiumello, Davide Intensive Care Med Review Modalities of fluid management in patients sustaining the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are challenging and controversial. Optimal fluid management should provide adequate oxygen delivery to the body, while avoiding inadvertent increase in lung edema which further impairs gas exchange. In ARDS patients, positive fluid balance has been associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital stay, and higher mortality. Accordingly, a restrictive strategy has been compared to a more liberal approach in randomized controlled trials conducted in various clinical settings. Restrictive strategies included fluid restriction guided by the monitoring of extravascular lung water, pulmonary capillary wedge or central venous pressure, and furosemide targeted to diuresis and/or albumin replacement in hypoproteinemic patients. Overall, restrictive strategies improved oxygenation significantly and reduced duration of mechanical ventilation, but had no significant effect on mortality. Fluid management may require different approaches depending on the time course of ARDS (i.e., early vs. late period). The effects of fluid strategy management according to ARDS phenotypes remain to be evaluated. Since ARDS is frequently associated with sepsis-induced acute circulatory failure, the prediction of fluid responsiveness is crucial in these patients to avoid hemodynamically inefficient—hence respiratory detrimental—fluid administration. Specific hemodynamic indices of fluid responsiveness or mini-fluid challenges should be preferably used. Since the positive airway pressure contributes to positive fluid balance in ventilated ARDS patients, it should be kept as low as possible. As soon as the hemodynamic status is stabilized, correction of cumulated fluid retention may rely on diuretics administration or renal replacement therapy. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-11-09 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7652045/ /pubmed/33169217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06310-0 Text en © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Review Vignon, Philippe Evrard, Bruno Asfar, Pierre Busana, Mattia Calfee, Carolyn S. Coppola, Silvia Demiselle, Julien Geri, Guillaume Jozwiak, Mathieu Martin, Greg S. Gattinoni, Luciano Chiumello, Davide Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? |
title | Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? |
title_full | Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? |
title_fullStr | Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? |
title_full_unstemmed | Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? |
title_short | Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management? |
title_sort | fluid administration and monitoring in ards: which management? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7652045/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33169217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06310-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vignonphilippe fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT evrardbruno fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT asfarpierre fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT busanamattia fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT calfeecarolyns fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT coppolasilvia fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT demisellejulien fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT geriguillaume fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT jozwiakmathieu fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT martingregs fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT gattinoniluciano fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement AT chiumellodavide fluidadministrationandmonitoringinardswhichmanagement |