scholarly journals Minimally invasive hemodynamic monitoring in septic patient

2015 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-181
Author(s):  
Liliana Mirea ◽  
◽  
Ioana Marina Grinţescu ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Hypovolemic Shock ◽  
Severe Form ◽  
Haemodynamic Monitoring ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring ◽  
Distributive Shock ◽  
Hemodynamic Model ◽  
Severe Pathology

Sepsis is the predominant diagnosis in the intensive care – a severe pathology, which implies a significant consumption of resources. The septic shock is the most severe form of sepsis, characterized by a hemodynamic collapse, having a mortality between 40-50%, despite recent advances related to technology for monitoring or therapeutic possibilities. The key to improving the prognosis of these patients is the recovery of hemodynamic, including microcirculatory, limiting peripheral hypoperfusion period. The theoretical hemodynamic model of septic shock is rare in practice, patients are associating the elements of distributive shock, but also elements of hypovolemic shock or cardiogenic elements. Therefore, the parameters characterizing the macro-circulation, as those type mean blood pressure or central venous pressure are irrelevant in these circumstances and it is always required an advanced and continuous haemodynamic monitoring integrating such parameters obtained into the treatment decisions.

Central venous pressure monitoring in critical care settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 230-236
Author(s):  
Barry Hill ◽  
Catherine Smith
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Central Venous Pressure ◽  
Right Atrium ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Haemodynamic Monitoring ◽  
Haemodynamic Instability ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
The Right

Patients who present with acute cardiovascular compromise require haemodynamic monitoring in a critical care unit. Central venous pressure (CVP) is the most frequently used measure to guide fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. It is most often done via a central venous catheter (CVC) positioned in the right atrium or superior or inferior vena cava as close to the right atrium as possible. The CVC is inserted via the internal jugular vein, subclavian vein or via the femoral vein, depending on the patient and their condition. Complications of CVC placement can be serious, so its risks and benefits need to be considered. Alternative methods to CVC use include transpulmonary thermodilution and transoesophageal Doppler ultrasound. Despite its widespread use, CVP has been challenged in many studies, which have reported it to be a poor predictor of haemodynamic responsiveness. However, it is argued that CVP monitoring provides important physiologic information for the evaluation of haemodynamic instability. Nurses have central roles during catheter insertion and in CVP monitoring, as well as in managing these patients and assessing risks.

scholarly journals Respiratory variation of inferior vena cava diameter and central venous pressure in ventilated and non-ventilated children in fluid refractory septic shock: an observational study

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 1947
Author(s):  
Mohd Kashif Ali ◽  
Eeman Naim
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Central Venous Pressure ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Spontaneously Breathing ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Background: Ultrasound guided fluid assessment in management of septic shock has come up as an adjunct to the current gold standard Central Venous Pressure monitoring. This study was designed to observe the respiro-phasic variation of IVC diameter (RV-IVCD) in invasively mechanically ventilated and spontaneously breathing paediatric patients of fluid refractory septic shock.Methods: This was a prospective observational study done at Paediatric intensive Care Unit (PICU) in Paediatric ward of Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital (JNMCH) from February 2016 to June 2017. 107 consecutive patients between 1 year to 16 years age who were in shock despite 40ml/kg of fluid administration were included. Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) diameters were measured at end-expiration and end inspiration and the IVC collapsibility index was calculated. Simultaneously Central Venous Pressure (CVP) was recorded. Both values were obtained in ventilated and non-ventilated patients. Data was analysed to determine to look for the profile of RV-IVCD and CVP in ventilated and non-ventilated cases.Results: Out of 107 patients, 91 were on invasive mechanical ventilation and 16 patients were spontaneously breathing. There was a strong negative correlation between central venous pressure (CVP) and inferior vena cava collapsibility (RV-IVCD) in both spontaneously breathing (-0.810) and mechanically ventilated patients (-0.700). Negative correlation was significant in both study groups in CVP <8 mmHg and only in spontaneously breathing patients in CVP 8-12 mmHg range. IVC collapsibility showed a decreasing trend with rising CVP in both spontaneously breathing and mechanically ventilated patients.Conclusion: Ultrasonography guided IVCCI appears to be a valuable index in assessing fluid status in both spontaneously breathing and mechanically ventilated septic shock patients. However, more data is required from the paediatric population so as to define it as standard of practice.

A central venous pressure goal of 8–12 mm Hg for all patients in septic shock

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 1441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. Donnino ◽  
Peter Clardy ◽  
Daniel Talmor
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Central Venous Pressure ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Central Venous

OPTIMAL CENTRAL VENOUS PRESSURE IN FLUID CHALLENGE IN SEVERE SEPSIS AND SEPTIC SHOCK.

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. A166
Author(s):  
Bogdan N Dobrin ◽  
Giulia Soldati ◽  
Marc Van Nuffelen ◽  
Jean-Louis Vincent
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Severe Sepsis ◽  
Central Venous Pressure ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Fluid Challenge ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Sepsis And Septic Shock

Septic Shock

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison Dalton ◽  
Mark Nunnally
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Early Recognition ◽  
Venous Pressure ◽  
Pressure Control ◽  
Organ Damage ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Saturation Pulse ◽  
Cyclical Pattern

Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Infectious injury leads to inflammation, which leads to additional injury. This cyclical pattern leads to tissue dysfunction, resulting in hypovolemic and vasodilatory shock, hyperdynamic circulatory shock, mitochondrial dysfunction, cellular apoptosis, and immunosuppression. Septic patients are unable to use oxygen effectively, leading to organ dysfunction. The key to management of sepsis is early recognition and treatment. Prompt administration of appropriate antibiotics (preferably but not necessarily following culture) is vital to avoiding the morbidity and mortality associated with sepsis. Aggressive fluid resuscitation resulting in improved blood flow to tissues is the mainstay of initial therapy for septic shock. Balancing the needs for improved preload against the consequences of excessive intravascular volume is paramount. There are many methods (e.g., central venous pressure, mixed/central venous saturation, pulse pressure variation, ultrasonography) to determine when a septic shock patient may no longer respond to fluids and requires vasoconstrictors or inotropes for blood pressure control. Early recognition of sepsis, treatment with appropriate antibiotics, and limiting end-organ damage have led to decreased in-hospital mortality associated with septic shock. This review contains 5 figures, 5 tables, and 105 references. Key Words: antibiotic therapy, fluid therapy, resuscitation, sepsis, shock

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document