Cargando…

Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure

Mean systemic filling pressure (Pms) is a promising parameter in determining intravascular fluid status. Pms derived from venous return curves during inspiratory holds with incremental airway pressures (Pms-Insp) estimates Pms reliably but is labor-intensive. A computerized algorithm to calculate Pm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meijs, Loek P.B., van Houte, Joris, Conjaerts, Bente C. M., Bindels, Alexander J. G. H., Bouwman, Arthur, Houterman, Saskia, Bakker, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8011774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33791920
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00636-2
_version_ 1783673273279578112
author Meijs, Loek P.B.
van Houte, Joris
Conjaerts, Bente C. M.
Bindels, Alexander J. G. H.
Bouwman, Arthur
Houterman, Saskia
Bakker, Jan
author_facet Meijs, Loek P.B.
van Houte, Joris
Conjaerts, Bente C. M.
Bindels, Alexander J. G. H.
Bouwman, Arthur
Houterman, Saskia
Bakker, Jan
author_sort Meijs, Loek P.B.
collection PubMed
description Mean systemic filling pressure (Pms) is a promising parameter in determining intravascular fluid status. Pms derived from venous return curves during inspiratory holds with incremental airway pressures (Pms-Insp) estimates Pms reliably but is labor-intensive. A computerized algorithm to calculate Pms (Pmsa) at the bedside has been proposed. In previous studies Pmsa and Pms-Insp correlated well but with considerable bias. This observational study was performed to validate Pmsa with Pms-Insp in cardiac surgery patients. Cardiac output, right atrial pressure and mean arterial pressure were prospectively recorded to calculate Pmsa using a bedside monitor. Pms-Insp was calculated offline after performing inspiratory holds. Intraclass-correlation coefficient (ICC) and assessment of agreement were used to compare Pmsa with Pms-Insp. Bias, coefficient of variance (COV), precision and limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. Proportional bias was assessed with linear regression. A high degree of inter-method reliability was found between Pmsa and Pms-Insp (ICC 0.89; 95%CI 0.72–0.96, p = 0.01) in 18 patients. Pmsa and Pms-Insp differed not significantly (11.9 mmHg, IQR 9.8–13.4 vs. 12.7 mmHg, IQR 10.5–14.4, p = 0.38). Bias was −0.502 ± 1.90 mmHg (p = 0.277). COV was 4% with LOA –4.22 − 3.22 mmHg without proportional bias. Conversion coefficient Pmsa ➔ Pms-Insp was 0.94. This assessment of agreement demonstrates that the measures Pms-Insp and the computerized Pmsa-algorithm are interchangeable (bias −0.502 ± 1.90 mmHg with conversion coefficient 0.94). The choice of Pmsa is straightforward, it is non-interventional and available continuously at the bedside in contrast to Pms-Insp which is interventional and calculated off-line. Further studies should be performed to determine the place of Pmsa in the circulatory management of critically ill patients. (www.clinicaltrials.gov; TRN NCT04202432, release date 16-12-2019; retrospectively registered). Clinical Trial Registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov, TRN: NCT04202432, initial release date 16-12-2019 (retrospectively registered).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8011774
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80117742021-04-01 Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure Meijs, Loek P.B. van Houte, Joris Conjaerts, Bente C. M. Bindels, Alexander J. G. H. Bouwman, Arthur Houterman, Saskia Bakker, Jan J Clin Monit Comput Original Research Mean systemic filling pressure (Pms) is a promising parameter in determining intravascular fluid status. Pms derived from venous return curves during inspiratory holds with incremental airway pressures (Pms-Insp) estimates Pms reliably but is labor-intensive. A computerized algorithm to calculate Pms (Pmsa) at the bedside has been proposed. In previous studies Pmsa and Pms-Insp correlated well but with considerable bias. This observational study was performed to validate Pmsa with Pms-Insp in cardiac surgery patients. Cardiac output, right atrial pressure and mean arterial pressure were prospectively recorded to calculate Pmsa using a bedside monitor. Pms-Insp was calculated offline after performing inspiratory holds. Intraclass-correlation coefficient (ICC) and assessment of agreement were used to compare Pmsa with Pms-Insp. Bias, coefficient of variance (COV), precision and limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. Proportional bias was assessed with linear regression. A high degree of inter-method reliability was found between Pmsa and Pms-Insp (ICC 0.89; 95%CI 0.72–0.96, p = 0.01) in 18 patients. Pmsa and Pms-Insp differed not significantly (11.9 mmHg, IQR 9.8–13.4 vs. 12.7 mmHg, IQR 10.5–14.4, p = 0.38). Bias was −0.502 ± 1.90 mmHg (p = 0.277). COV was 4% with LOA –4.22 − 3.22 mmHg without proportional bias. Conversion coefficient Pmsa ➔ Pms-Insp was 0.94. This assessment of agreement demonstrates that the measures Pms-Insp and the computerized Pmsa-algorithm are interchangeable (bias −0.502 ± 1.90 mmHg with conversion coefficient 0.94). The choice of Pmsa is straightforward, it is non-interventional and available continuously at the bedside in contrast to Pms-Insp which is interventional and calculated off-line. Further studies should be performed to determine the place of Pmsa in the circulatory management of critically ill patients. (www.clinicaltrials.gov; TRN NCT04202432, release date 16-12-2019; retrospectively registered). Clinical Trial Registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov, TRN: NCT04202432, initial release date 16-12-2019 (retrospectively registered). Springer Netherlands 2021-03-31 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8011774/ /pubmed/33791920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00636-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Meijs, Loek P.B.
van Houte, Joris
Conjaerts, Bente C. M.
Bindels, Alexander J. G. H.
Bouwman, Arthur
Houterman, Saskia
Bakker, Jan
Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
title Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
title_full Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
title_fullStr Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
title_full_unstemmed Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
title_short Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
title_sort clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8011774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33791920
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00636-2
work_keys_str_mv AT meijsloekpb clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure
AT vanhoutejoris clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure
AT conjaertsbentecm clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure
AT bindelsalexanderjgh clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure
AT bouwmanarthur clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure
AT houtermansaskia clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure
AT bakkerjan clinicalvalidationofacomputerizedalgorithmtodeterminemeansystemicfillingpressure