• Yong-hao Xu, Xiao-qing Liu, Wei-qun He, Yuan-da Xu, Si-bei Chen, Ling-bo Nong, Hong-chuan Huang, and Yi-min Li.
• Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
• Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2011 Aug 1;23(8):462-6.

ObjectiveTo investigate the value of intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI) monitoring in fluid management strategy in septic shock patients.MethodsIn a prospective study, 33 patients who were diagnosed to be suffering from septic shock in the intensive care unit (ICU) were enrolled . Seventeen patients who received pulse indicator continuous cardiac output (PiCCO) monitoring, and ITBVI was used as indicator of fluid management, were enrolled into ITBVI group; 16 patients who received traditional fluid management strategy [directed by central venous pressure (CVP)] were enrolled into control group. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHEII) score, sepsis related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and vasopressor score were compared between 1 day and 3 days of treatment. The characteristics of fluid management were recorded and compared within 72 hours.Results(1)In 3 days of treatment, APACHEII, SOFA and vasopressor score were significantly lower in ITBVI group compared with that of in 1 day of treatment[21.3±6.2 vs. 25.4±7.2, 6.1±3.4 vs. 9.0±3.5, 5 (0, 8.0) vs. 20.0 (8.0, 35.0), respectively, all P<0.01], whereas there were no changes in control group. (2)Although fluid output (ml) was higher in ITBVI group during 48-72 hours period (2 421± 868 vs. 1 721±934, P=0.039), there was no difference in fluid intake, fluid output or fluid balance (ml) within 0-72 hours between two groups (fluid intake: 9 918±137 vs. 10 529±1 331, fluid output : 6 035±1 739 vs. 5 827±2 897, fluid balance: 3 882±1 889 vs. 4 703±2 813, allP>0.05). (3)Comparing the fluid volume (ml) used for fluid replacement period, except that there was no significance in fluid challenge with colloid during 0-6 hours between two groups [ml: 250 (125, 500) vs. 250 (69,250), P>0.05], more fluid intake (ml) was found in ITBVI group [0-6 hours crystalloid: 250(150,250) vs. 125 (105,125), 6-72 hours crystalloid: 125 (125, 250) vs. 100 (56, 125), 0-72 hours crystalloid: 250(125, 250) vs. 125 (75, 125), 6-72 hours colloid: 125 (106, 250) vs. 75 (50, 125), 0-72 hours colloid: 200 (125, 250) vs. 100 (50, 125),all P<0.01].ConclusionClinical picture in patients with septic shock is improved after 3 days of treatment than 1 day of treatment under fluid management directed by ITBVI, compared with by CVP. This improvement may be attributable to accurate assessment of preload and appropriate infusion rate in fluid challenge.

14 keywords...

hide…