Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37940953›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2023

Reliability of pulse pressure and stroke volume variation in assessing fluid responsiveness in the operating room: a metanalysis and a metaregression.

Antonio Messina, Mariagiovanna Caporale, Lorenzo Calabrò, Giulia Lionetti, Daniele Bono, Guia Margherita Matronola, Andrea Brunati, Luciano Frassanito, Emanuela Morenghi, Massimo Antonelli and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Antonio MessinaDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano - Milan, Italy. antonio.messina@humanitas.it.
Mariagiovanna CaporaleDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli' IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Lorenzo CalabròDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano - Milan, Italy.
Giulia LionettiDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano - Milan, Italy.
Daniele BonoDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano - Milan, Italy.
Guia Margherita MatronolaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Andrea BrunatiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20072, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Luciano FrassanitoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli' IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Emanuela MorenghiDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano - Milan, Italy.
Massimo AntonelliDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario 'A. Gemelli' IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Michelle S ChewDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Maurizio CecconiDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano - Milan, Italy.
Humanitas University · ITIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITLinköping University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPulse pressure and stroke volume variation (PPV and SVV) have been widely used in surgical patients as predictors of fluid challenge (FC) response. Several factors may affect the reliability of these indices in predicting fluid responsiveness, such as the position of the patient, the use of laparoscopy and the opening of the abdomen or the chest, combined FC characteristics, the tidal volume (Vt) and the type of anesthesia.

methodsSystematic review and metanalysis of PPV and SVV use in surgical adult patients. The QUADAS-2 scale was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies. We adopted a metanalysis pooling of aggregate data from 5 subgroups of studies with random effects models using the common-effect inverse variance model. The area under the curve (AUC) of pooled receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curves was reported. A metaregression was performed using FC type, volume, and rate as independent variables.

resultsWe selected 59 studies enrolling 2,947 patients, with a median of fluid responders of 55% (46-63). The pooled AUC for the PPV was 0.77 (0.73-0.80), with a mean threshold of 10.8 (10.6-11.0). The pooled AUC for the SVV was 0.76 (0.72-0.80), with a mean threshold of 12.1 (11.6-12.7); 19 studies (32.2%) reported the grey zone of PPV or SVV, with a median of 56% (40-62) and 57% (46-83) of patients included, respectively. In the different subgroups, the AUC and the best thresholds ranged from 0.69 and 0.81 and from 6.9 to 11.5% for the PPV, and from 0.73 to 0.79 and 9.9 to 10.8% for the SVV. A high Vt and the choice of colloids positively impacted on PPV performance, especially among patients with closed chest and abdomen, or in prone position.

conclusionThe overall performance of PPV and SVV in operating room in predicting fluid responsiveness is moderate, ranging close to an AUC of 0.80 only some subgroups of surgical patients. The grey zone of these dynamic indices is wide and should be carefully considered during the assessment of fluid responsiveness. A high Vt and the choice of colloids for the FC are factors potentially influencing PPV reliability.

trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD42022379120), December 2022. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=379120.

Indexed as

HemodynamicsOperating RoomsAdultBlood PressureColloidsFluid TherapyHumansReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveStroke VolumeColloidsFluid responsivenessFluid therapyHemodynamic monitoringPulse pressure variationStroke volume variation

Identifiers

PMID37940953
PMCPMC10631038
OpenAlexW4388493668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.