Article Sidebar

PDF (Tiếng Việt)
Published: 2025-09-25
Abstract Views: 42
Views PDF (Tiếng Việt): 30
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52163/yhc.v66iCD13.3172
Issue
Vol. 66 No. CĐ13- HNKH Gây mê Hồi sức
Section
Articles
How to Cite
Liễu, N. T., & Đồng, T. V. . (2025). 6. ASSESSING THE IMPACT ON SOME HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS AND THE ABILITY TO PREDICTION FLUID RESPONSE WHEN CHANGING PEEP IN PATIENTS WITH SHOCK DURING RESUSCITATION. Vietnam Journal of Community Medicine, 66(CĐ13- HNKH Gây mê Hồi sức). https://doi.org/10.52163/yhc.v66iCD13.3172

6. ASSESSING THE IMPACT ON SOME HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS AND THE ABILITY TO PREDICTION FLUID RESPONSE WHEN CHANGING PEEP IN PATIENTS WITH SHOCK DURING RESUSCITATION

Nguyen Thi Lieu1, Trinh Van Dong1
1 Hanoi Medical University

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate hemodynamic changes and the predictive value of fluid responsiveness when gradually increasing PEEP levels in intensive care unit patients with shock.


Subjects and methods: A prospective, self-controlled interventional study was conducted on 36 shock patients monitored using the PiCCO hemodynamic system from January to June 2025 at the Center for Anesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Viet Duc University Hospital.


Results: The ROC curve demonstrated that the area under the curve of changes in cardiac index (CI) during PEEP adjustment in predicting fluid responsiveness was 0.61. The optimal cutoff for ΔCI was identified as ≥ 5.5%, with a sensitivity of 95.0%, specificity of 75.0%, and a Youden index of 0.700. In the fluid-responsive group, when PEEP was increased from 5 to 10 and then 15 cmH₂O, CI decreased from 3.14 ± 0.88 to 2.86 ± 0.76 and 2.70 ± 0.70 l/min/m², respectively; systolic blood pressure decreased from 107.3 ± 18.2 to 99.4 ± 16.6 and 95.6 ± 15.1 mmHg; mean arterial pressure dropped from 77.8 ± 10.5 to 72.1 ± 9.3 and 69.1 ± 8.6 mmHg; and central venous pressure increased from 7.4 ± 2.9 to 9.2 ± 3.0 and 10.75 ± 3.1 cmH₂O (p < 0.001). Stroke volume variation and pulse pressure variation showed a mild increase without statistical significance. In the non-responder group, hemodynamic parameters remained relatively unchanged.


Conclusion: Stepwise PEEP elevation induces significant hemodynamic changes in preload-dependent patients and may serve as a supportive tool for assessing fluid responsiveness in clinical practice.

Article Details

Keywords

Shock, PEEP, cardiac index, invasive hemodynamic monitoring, fluid responsiveness.

References

[1] Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W, Antonelli M, Coopersmith C.M, French C et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021. Intensive Care Med, 2021 Nov, 47 (11): 1181-247.
[2] Abdullah T, Ali A, Saka E, Canbaz M, Gokduman C, Polat O et al. Ability of short-time low peep challenge to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care. J Clin Monit Comput [Internet], 2022 [cited 2025 Jun 26], 36 (4): 1165-72. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8412862/
[3] Chen J.T, Roberts R, Fazzari M.J, Kashani K, Qadir N, Cairns C.B et al. Variation in Fluid and Vasopressor Use in Shock With and Without Physiologic Assessment: A Multicenter Observational Study. Crit Care Med, 2020 Oct, 48 (10): 1436-44.
[4] Wilkman E, Kuitunen A, Pettilä V, Varpula M. Fluid responsiveness predicted by elevation of PEEP in patients with septic shock. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 2014 Jan, 58 (1): 27-35.