Acute lung injury is associated with accumulation of extravascular lung water (EVLW). The aim of the present study was to compare two methods for quantification of EVLW: transpulmonary single thermodilution (EVLWST) and postmortem gravimetric (EVLWG).
Methods
Eighteen instrumented and awake sheep were randomly assigned to one of three groups. All groups received Ringer's lactate (5 ml/kg per hour intravenously). To induce lung injury of different severities, sheep received Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide 15 ng/kg per min intravenously for 6 hours (n = 7) or oleic acid 0.06 ml/kg intravenously over 30 min (n = 7). A third group (n = 4) was subjected to sham operation. Haemodynamic variables, including EVLWST, were measured using a PiCCOplus monitor (Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany), and the last measurement of EVLWST was compared with EVLWG.
Results
At the end of experiment, values for EVLWST (mean ± standard error) were 8.9 ± 0.6, 11.8 ± 1.0 and 18.2 ± 0.9 ml/kg in the sham-operated, lipopolysaccharide and oleic acid groups, respectively (P < 0.05). The corresponding values for EVLWIG were 6.2 ± 0.3, 7.1 ± 0.6 and 11.8 ± 0.7 ml/kg (P < 0.05). Ranges of EVLWIST and EVLWIG values were 7.5–21.0 and 4.9–14.5 ml/kg. Regression analysis between in vivo EVLWST and postmortem EVLWG yielded the following relation: EVLWST = 1.30 × EVLWG + 2.32 (n = 18, r = 0.85, P < 0.0001). The mean bias ± 2 standard deviations between EVLWST and EVLWG was 4.9 ± 5.1 ml/kg (P < 0.001).
Conclusion
In sheep, EVLW determined using transpulmonary single thermodilution correlates closely with gravimetric measurements over a wide range of changes. However, transpulmonary single thermodilution overestimates EVLW as compared with postmortem gravimetry.
Acute lung injury (ALI) of septic and non-septic origin is a frequent cause of mortality in critically ill patients. During ALI, the inflammatory process in the lungs may increase the microvascular pressure and permeability, resulting in an accumulation of extravascular lung water (EVLW) and development of pulmonary oedema [1]. However, it is difficult to estimate the amount of oedema fluid at the bedside. Clinical examination, chest radiography and blood gases have proven to be of limited value in quantifying pulmonary oedema [1–3]. Several techniques to assess EVLW have therefore been developed.
Among the various methods for measurement of EVLW, thermo-dye dilution has been used most frequently [4–8]. In animal models of lung oedema, this method has been evaluated by comparison with postmortem gravimetry, which is supposed to be the 'gold standard' of EVLW measurements [7–9]. In critically ill patients, fluid management guided by thermo-dye measured EVLW was associated with improved clinical outcome [10]. Hence, EVLW has been suggested to play a role as an independent predictor of the prognosis and course of illness [6, 8, 10]. However, the thermo-dye dilution method is relatively time consuming, cumbersome and expensive. For these reasons, the method has not gained general acceptance [4, 5, 7].
Use of a technique based on injection of a single thermo-indicator that can be detected using an indwelling arterial catheter was an appealing concept. Recent experimental and clinical studies have shown that EVLW assessed by single thermodilution (ST) exhibits good reproducibility and close agreement with the thermo-dye double indicator technique [11, 12]. The ST method is simpler to apply, less invasive and more cost effective; all of these factors make it more suitable for use at the bedside. However, to date, this new method has been sparsely evaluated against gravimetry [13, 14], and further validation is needed.
Thus, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of the ST technique by comparing it with that of postmortem gravimetry (EVLWG) in conscious sheep, in which ALI was induced either by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or by oleic acid (OA). Both of these models of ALI are reproducible and have been extensively described [7, 9, 11, 15, 16].
Methods
Surgical preparation and measurements
The study was approved by the Norwegian Experimental Animal Board and conducted in compliance with the European Convention on Animal Care. Eighteen yearling sheep weighing 27.5 ± 0.4 kg were instrumented, as a modification to previously described techniques [16–19], by inserting introducers into the left external jugular vein and common carotid artery. After 1–4 days of recovery, sheep were placed in an experimental pen. A thermodilution catheter (131HF7; Edwards Life Sciences, Irvine, CA, USA) was introduced into the pulmonary artery and a 4-Fr thermistor-tipped catheter (PV2014L16; Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) into the carotid artery. The catheters were connected to pressure transducers (Transpac®III [Abbott, North Chicago, IL, USA] and PV8115 [Pulsion Medical Systems], respectively).
Mean pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), pulmonary arterial occlusion pressure (PAOP) and right atrial pressure (RAP) were displayed on a 565A Patient Data Monitor (Kone, Espoo, Finland) and recorded on a Gould Polygraph (Gould Instruments, Cleveland, OH, USA). Heart rate, mean systemic arterial pressure, cardiac index (CI), systemic vascular resistance index, extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) assessed using the single thermodilution technique (EVLWIST), pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI), global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) index (GEDVI), intrathoracic blood volume (ITBV) index (ITBVI) and blood temperature were determined at 1-hour intervals using a PiCCOplus monitor (Pulsion Medical Systems). Every value reported here is the mean of three consecutive measurements, each consisting of a 10 ml bolus of ice-cold 5% dextrose injected into the right atrium randomly during the respiratory cycle.
To estimate EVLW we used the following formula [12]: EVLWST (ml) = ITTV - ITBV (where ITTV is the intrathoracic thermal volume). During clinical application of ST by means of the PiCCO monitor, ITBV is calculated as 1.25 × GEDV, the coefficient 1.25 being derived from critically ill patients [12]. However, in our previous investigations in sheep [17–19], in which ITBV was measured directly using the thermal-dye dilution technique, we found the coefficient to be 1.34 [14]. Thus, in the present study we used the corrected values of ITBVI, EVLWIST and PVPI, based on the following equation: ITBVI = 1.34 × GEDVI.
Blood samples were drawn from the systemic arterial (a) and pulmonary arterial (v) lines and analyzed every two hours for blood gases and haemoglobin (Rapid 860; Chiron Diagnostics Corporation, East Walpole, MA, USA). The pulmonary vascular resistance index (PVRI), venous admixture (Qs/Qt), oxygen delivery index (DO2I) and oxygen consumption index were calculated as described previously [16, 19, 20].
Experimental protocol
After establishing a stable baseline at time 0 hours, awake and spontaneously breathing sheep were randomly assigned to three experimental groups: a sham operated group (n = 4); a LPS group (n = 7), receiving an intravenous infusion of Escherichia coli O26:B6 LPS (Sigma Chemical, St. Louis, MO, USA) at 15 ng/kg per min for 6 hours; and an OA group (n = 7), in which sheep were subjected to an intravenous infusion of OA (Sigma Chemical) 0.06 ml/kg mixed with the animal's blood. The duration of the infusion of OA was 30 min.
During the experiment, all animals received a continuous infusion (5 ml/kg per hour) of Ringer's lactate, aiming to maintain intravascular volume at baseline levels. After the last measurements, at 2 hours in the OA group and at 6 hours in the sham-operated and the LPS groups, the sheep were anaesthetized and killed with a lethal dose of potassium chloride. Then, postmortem EVLWI (EVLWIG) was determined by gravimetry, as previously described [21–24].
Statistical analysis
For each continuous variable, normality was checked using the Kholmogorov-Smirnov test. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean, and assessed by analysis of variance followed by Scheffe's test or test of contrasts, when appropriate. To evaluate the relationship between EVLWIST and EVLWIG, we used linear regression and Bland-Altman analysis. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
All animals survived until the end of the experiments. At baseline no significant differences were found between groups, as shown in Figs 1 and 2, and Tables 1 and 2. In the sham-operated sheep, all variables remained unchanged throughout the study.
Figure 1
Changes in pulmonary haemodynamics and extravascular lung water in sheep. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean. *P < 0.05, LPS versus sham-operated group; †P < 0.05, OA versus sham-operated group; ‡P < 0.05, LPS versus OA group; §P < 0.05, versus t = 0 hours in LPS group; llP < 0.05 versus t = 0 hours in OA group. EVLWIST = extravascular lung water index measured by single thermodilution; LPS = lipopolysaccharide; OA = oleic acid; PAP = pulmonary arterial pressure; PVPI = pulmonary vascular permeability index; Sham = sham-operated group.
Figure 2
Changes in oxygenation variables in sheep. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean. *P < 0.05, LPS versus sham-operated group; †P < 0.05, OA versus sham-operated group; ‡P < 0.05, LPS versus OA group; §P < 0.05, versus t = 0 hours in LPS group; llP < 0.05, versus t = 0 hours in OA group. DO2I = oxygen delivery index; LPS = lipopolysaccharide; OA = oleic acid; Qs/Qt = venous admixture; SaO2 = arterial oxygen saturation; Sham = sham-operated; SvO2 = venous oxygen saturation.
Table 1
Haemodynamics during acute lung injury in sheep
Parameter
Group
Time point (hours)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
PVRI (dyne·s/cm5 per m2)
Sham
117 ± 14
131 ± 19
141 ± 10
145 ± 11
114 ± 21
133 ± 13
151 ± 16
LPS
115 ± 6
284 ± 20*†
240 ± 21*†
198 ± 31†
193 ± 26*†
199 ± 23*†
182 ± 16*†
OA
103 ± 9
351 ± 64‡§
300 ± 45‡§
-
-
-
-
GEDVI (ml/m2)
Sham
570 ± 46
601 ± 68
572 ± 43
566 ± 12
661 ± 74
607 ± 67
655 ± 60
LPS
571 ± 23
620 ± 57
564 ± 32
579 ± 42
598 ± 38
624 ± 42
615 ± 37
OA
646 ± 38
629 ± 60
590 ± 55
-
-
-
-
ITBVI (ml/m2)
Sham
764 ± 62
806 ± 91
766 ± 58
759 ± 16
886 ± 99
813 ± 90
878 ± 81
LPS
765 ± 30
831 ± 76
756 ± 43
776 ± 57
801 ± 51
836 ± 57
825 ± 49
OA
866 ± 51
912 ± 42
790 ± 74
-
-
-
-
HR (beats/min)
Sham
106 ± 6
104 ± 8
96 ± 7
91 ± 5
99 ± 6
98 ± 11
97 ± 5
LPS
96 ± 4
122 ± 6†
109 ± 6
109 ± 4*†
109 ± 8
122 ± 4*†
130 ± 5*†
OA
111 ± 5
104 ± 13
102 ± 13
-
-
-
-
CI (l/min per m2)
Sham
5.7 ± 0.3
5.5 ± 0.3
5.2 ± 0.3
5.1 ± 0.2
5.4 ± 0.4
5.2 ± 0.3
5.3 ± 0.3
LPS
5.7 ± 0.1
7.3 ± 0.5*†ll
5.9 ± 0.2
5.8 ± 0.3
5.6 ± 0.4
6.2 ± 0.3*
6.8 ± 0.2*†
OA
6.1 ± 0.3
4.5 ± 0.3§
4.6 ± 0.5
-
-
-
-
MAP (mmHg)
Sham
102 ± 5
101 ± 6
101 ± 6
101 ± 5
102 ± 5
102 ± 5
101 ± 4
LPS
94 ± 4
104 ± 5†
105 ± 3†
106 ± 4†
105 ± 3†
104 ± 5
100 ± 6
OA
94 ± 4
101 ± 2
104 ± 4§
-
-
-
-
SVRI (dyne·s/cm5 per m2)
Sham
1453 ± 101
1496 ± 125
1589 ± 138
1536 ± 105
1579 ± 109
1607 ± 119
1681 ± 169
LPS
1410 ± 81
1128 ± 102†
1352 ± 62
1515 ± 107
1428 ± 101
1308 ± 79
1126 ± 58*†
OA
1266 ± 63
1847 ± 368
1670 ± 147§
-
-
-
-
Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean. *P < 0.05, LPS versus sham-operated group; †P < 0.05, versus t = 0 hours in LPS group; ‡P < 0.05, OA versus sham-operated group; §P < 0.05, versus t = 0 hours in OA group; llP < 0.05, LPS versus OA group. CI, cardiac index; GEDVI, global end-diastolic volume index; HR, heart rate; ITBVI, intrathoracic blood volume index; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; MAP, mean arterial pressure; OA, oleic acid; PVRI, pulmonary vascular resistance index; Sham, sham-operated; SVRI, systemic vascular resistance index.
Table 2
Gas exchange during acute lung injury in sheep
Parameter
Group
Time point (hours)
0
2
4
6
pHa
Sham
7.52 ± 0.03
7.53 ± 0.02
7.50 ± 0.02
7.50 ± 0.02
LPS
7.48 ± 0.01
7.50 ± 0.02
7.55 ± 0.02*
7.53 ± 0.02
OA
7.50 ± 0.01
7.44 ± 0.03†
-
-
PaCO2 (mmHg)
Sham
38.7 ± 2.7
36.4 ± 2.1
36.4 ± 1.6
37.4 ± 1.0
LPS
39.7 ± 1.4
38.8 ± 1.5
32.6 ± 0.6*‡
33.1 ± 1.0*‡
OA
36.4 ± 1.1
42.5 ± 3.7
-
-
Haemoglobin (g/dl)
Sham
10.7 ± 0.9
10.1 ± 0.6
10.2 ± 0.5
10.3 ± 0.5
LPS
10.4 ± 0.6
10.4 ± 0.6
11.0 ± 0.7*
10.9 ± 0.6
OA
10.3 ± 0.4
10.7 ± 0.5
-
-
Blood temperature (°C)
Sham
39.3 ± 0.1
39.2 ± 0.1
39.3 ± 0.1
39.3 ± 0.1
LPS
39.3 ± 0.1
40.0 ± 0.1*‡
41.3 ± 0.1*‡
41.0 ± 0.1*‡
OA
39.5 ± 0.1
39.6 ± 0.1
-
-
Data are expressed as means ± standard error of the mean. *P < 0.05, versus t = 0 hours in LPS group; †P < 0.05, OA versus sham operated group; ‡P < 0.05, LPS versus sham-operated group. LPS, lipopolysaccharide; OA, oleic acid; PaCO2, arterial carbon dioxide tension; Sham, sham-operated.
Haemodynamic and extravascular lung water measurements
Figure 1 and Table 1 show that LPS and OA induced marked increments in PAP and PVRI, peaking at 1 hour and subsequently decreasing gradually to values significantly above the respective baselines and the corresponding values in the sham-operated group. PAOP and RAP also rose in both the LPS and the OA groups (P < 0.05; data not shown). In parallel, LPS increased EVLWIST transiently by 20–35% (P < 0.05; Fig. 1). After OA administration, EVLWIST rose to a maximum of 84% above baseline (P < 0.01). At the end of the experiment, EVLWIST in the OA group had increased by 6.4 ml/kg and 9.3 ml/kg relative to the LPS and the sham-operated groups, corresponding to increments of 54% and 104%, respectively (P < 0.05). PVPI increased by 40% after LPS administration and by 90% after OA (P < 0.05; Fig. 1). GEDVI and ITBVI varied within 10–15% of baseline with no intergroup differences. As shown in Table 1, LPS caused tachycardia and a rise in CI accompanied by a slight increase in mean arterial pressure whereas systemic vascular resistance index decreased (P < 0.05). In contrast, in the OA group CI declined and systemic vascular resistance index increased relative to baseline (P < 0.05).
Oxygenation and gas exchange
LPS caused significant increments in mixed venous oxygen saturation, DO2I and Qs/Qt (Fig. 2). OA decreased both arterial and venous oxygenation and reduced DO2I (P < 0.05). Oxygen consumption index did not change significantly (not shown). LPS caused a transient reduction in arterial carbon dioxide tension and a rise in pH (P < 0.05; Table 2). After OA, pH decreased (P = 0.04). The haemoglobin concentration as well as the body temperature rose only in the LPS group (P < 0.05).
Linear regression and Bland-Altman analysis
As shown in Fig. 3, the regression analysis between EVLWST and postmortem EVLWG yielded the following relation: EVLWIST = 1.30 × EVLWG + 2.32 (n = 18, r = 0.85, P < 0.0001). Notably, the mean EVLWIST at the end of experiment was higher than EVLWIG: 13.6 ± 1.1 ml/kg versus 8.7 ± 0.7 ml/kg (P = 0.0005). Ranges of EVLWIST and EVLWIG values were 7.5–21.0 ml/kg and 4.9–14.5 ml/kg. According to the Bland-Altman analysis, the mean difference between EVLWIST and EVLWIG was 4.91 ml/kg, with upper and lower limits of agreement (± 2 standard deviations) of +9.99 ml/kg and -0.17 ml/kg, respectively (Fig. 4). The difference between methods increased with increasing values of mean EVLWI (n = 18, r = 0.64; P = 0.005); the regression line equation was as follows: EVLWIST - EVLWIG = 0.89 × ([EVLWIST + EVLWIG]/2) + 6.82.
Figure 3
Linear regression analysis between extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) as determined by transpulmonary single thermodilution (EVLWIST) and postmortem gravimetry (EVLWIG) in sheep. EVLWIST = 1.30 × EVLWG + 2.32 (n = 18, r = 0.85, P < 0.0001). Line of identity is dashed; 95% confidence intervals are indicated by solid lines. LPS, lipopolysaccharide; OA, oleic acid; Sham, sham-operated.
Figure 4
Bland-Altman plot for the extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) measured using transpulmonary single thermodilution (EVLWIST) and postmortem gravimetry (EVLWIG) in sheep. The x-axis shows the mean of EVLWI measurements by single thermodilution and gravimetry. The y-axis shows the difference between the methods. The bold line indicates the value for the mean difference between EVLWIST and EVLWIG (bias), and each dashed line indicates two standard deviations (SDs). Mean difference EVLWIST - EVLWIG = 4.91 ml/kg (SD 2.54 ml/kg).
Postmortem gravimetry
As shown in Fig. 5, EVLWIG in the OA group increased by 4.7 ml/kg and 5.6 ml/kg relative to the LPS and the sham-operated groups, amounting to increments by 65% and 90%, respectively (P = 0.001).
Figure 5
Gravimetric extravascular lung water index (EVLWIG) in sheep. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean. †P < 0.05, OA versus sham-operated group; ‡P < 0.05, LPS versus OA group. LPS = lipopolysaccharide; OA = oleic acid; Sham = sham-operated group.
Discussion
The present findings confirm that, in sheep, EVLW measured using the single transpulmonary thermodilution technique correlates closely with EVLW determined using postmortem gravimetry. However, EVLWIST overestimates EVLWIG, with the degree of overestimation increasing with the severity of ALI.
A number of experimental and clinical studies focused on the potential role of EVLW as a guide to diagnosis and treatment of critically ill patients [3, 6–14, 25, 26]. During pulmonary oedema, accumulation of EVLW occurs before any changes take place in blood gases, chest radiogram and, ultimately, pressure variables. In addition, the latter variables are nonspecific diagnostic tools that are influenced by a variety of factors [2, 4, 5, 8]. Thus, Boussat and coworkers [3] recently demonstrated that, in sepsis induced ALI, commonly used filling pressures such as PAOP and RAP are poor indicators of pulmonary oedema. Rather than those measures, they recommended direct measurement of EVLW. Consistent with this, we found that EVLW, in contrast to RAP, correlates with markers of lung injury in human septic shock [26]. Victims of ALI, regardless of pathogenesis, have a significantly higher EVLW than do other patients [6, 26]. Hence, measurement of EVLW supports the diagnosis and may even improve clinical outcomes when used cautiously in combination with treatment protocols that are known to hasten the resolution of pulmonary oedema [10, 25].
Instrumented awake sheep represents a stable experimental model for measuring cardiopulmonary variables, as demonstrated in the sham-operated group in the present study as well as by other investigators [15, 27]. The model can be used to assess different interventions during ALI.
Consistent with previous investigators [15, 17, 27], we observed that infusion of LPS and OA caused pulmonary hypertension, increased EVLW and impaired gas exchange. Despite increments in PAP, PAOP and PVRI, both ITBV and GEDV remained constant whereas PVPI (an index of microvascular permeability, calculated as the ratio of EVLW to pulmonary blood volume) increased significantly. Thus, the haemodynamic responses to LPS and OA are not purely hydrostatic but may also manifest as noncardiogenic permeability pulmonary oedema [13, 15–18, 27, 28].
In the present study lung oedema was significantly more severe in the OA group than in the LPS group, which is consistent with the findings of other investigators [29]. In fact, OA causes acute haemorrhagic alveolitis, which may lead to acute endothelial and alveolar necrosis and a severe proteinaceous oedema [30]. In contrast, the LPS-induced ALI is initiated by accumulation of granulocytes and lymphocytes in the pulmonary microcirculation that results in more moderate damage to endothelial cells and lung oedema [31].
Lung injury in the LPS group was accompanied by a hyperdynamic circulatory state, which was manifested by systemic vasodilation and increments in CI and DO2I toward the end of the experiment. In contrast, in the OA group we observed cardiac depression and systemic vasoconstriction. This is consistent with previous investigations of LPS and OA [18, 27, 30, 32]. Thus, ovine models exhibit a scatter of cardiopulmonary changes from normal in the sham-operated group to mild or moderate ALI in endotoxaemic sheep and moderate to severe ALI in animals subjected to OA.
The significant correlation of EVLWIST and EVLWIG observed in the present study is consistent with findings of Katzenelson and coworkers [13], who validated EVLWIST versus postmortem gravimetry in dogs [13]. However, those investigators did not specifically assess the relationship between EVLWIST and EVLWIG in sepsis-induced ALI. In addition, their study was performed in anaesthetized and mechanically ventilated animals; hence, further investigation of the correlation in a conscious state was required. Recently, ST has been evaluated against the thermo-dye dilution method in both experimental and clinical settings [11, 12]. The studies revealed a close agreement between the techniques. Thus, we believe that injection of cold saline can provide valuable information about the EVLW content and the severity of pulmonary oedema.
During ALI, both ST and postmortem gravimetry demonstrated similar relative increases in EVLWI as compared with sham-operated animals. However, we noticed that ST overestimates the absolute values of EVLWI compared with the gravimetric technique – a discrepancy that increased with progression of pulmonary oedema. This finding could be accounted for by heat exchange of the thermal indicator with extravascular intrathoracic structures, such as the walls of the large vessels and the myocardium, and by recirculation of the indicator [8]. In addition, the coefficients for calculation of EVLWIST and ITBV may vary with weight and age, as well as between animal species [11]. Consequently, in the experimental setting EVLWIST requires a specific correction. In the present study we replaced the coefficient 1.25 used in humans in the ITBVI equation (i.e. ITBVI = 1.25 × GEDVI) with the recalculated 'ovine' coefficient 1.34 [14], which is based on 426 measurements in 48 animals [17–19].
In contrast to ST, the thermo-dye dilution technique runs the risk of underestimating EVLW in comparison with gravimetry [4]. This underestimation increases during ALI caused by instillation of hydrochloric acid into the airways, and has been explained by redistribution of pulmonary blood flow away from the oedematous areas. The redistribution is thought to prevent indicator diffusion and consequently to prevent detection of oedema [7]. In addition, detection of EVLW by thermo-dye dilution can be impaired by changes in CI as well as by positive end-expiratory pressure during mechanical ventilation [8, 28].
Compared with other techniques for assessment of EVLW, ST may underestimate EVLW during pulmonary oedema due to intratracheal instillation of saline, although it is an accurate method in normal lungs [33]. However, intratracheal instillation of saline can also be criticized because a proportion of the fluid is rapidly absorbed and obscured from detection [34].
Notably, the use of postmortem gravimetry as the reference method for evaluating pulmonary oedema also has limitations [21, 33]. For example, the method only allows one measurement and is therefore of no use in following variations over time. The application of gravimetry is limited almost exclusively to experimental studies. The comparison of gravimetric measurement with results of other techniques for determination of EVLW can be influenced by the duration from death to removal of the lungs and by pathophysiological changes in the lungs after cardiac arrest. Thus, the gravimetric technique can underestimate the real value of EVLWI because of partial reabsorption of fluid before excision of the lungs.
Conclusion
The determination of EVLW by ST in sheep correlates closely with gravimetric measurements over a wide range of changes, and thus it may potentially be of benefit in quantifying lung oedema in critically ill patients. However, compared with postmortem gravimetry, single transpulmonary thermodilution overestimates the absolute values of EVLW. Thus, further studies are warranted to evaluate the accuracy of this method for managing ALI in humans.
Key messages
In sheep, extravascular lung water assessed by transpulmonary single thermodilution correlates closely with gravimetric measurements over a wide range of changes.
Despite a moderate overestimation of the extravascular lung water content compared with post-mortem gravimetry, single thermodilution can be a useful tool for assessment of pulmonary oedema during ALI.
Author contributions
MYK participated in the design of study, performed statistical analysis, and drafted the manuscript. VVK participated in the design of study, performed statistical analysis, and prepared the figures. VVK and KW participated in the design of study. LJB participated in the design of study and provided coordination. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Abbreviations
ALI:
acute lung injury
CI:
cardiac index
DO:
oxygen delivery index
EVLW:
extravascular lung water
EVLWI:
extravascular lung water index
GEDV:
global end-diastolic volume
GEDVI:
global end-diastolic volume index
ITBV:
intrathoracic blood volume
ITBVI:
intrathoracic blood volume index
LPS:
lipopolysaccharide
OA:
oleic acid
PAOP:
pulmonary arterial occlusion pressure
PAP:
pulmonary arterial pressure
PVPI:
pulmonary vascular permeability index
PVRI:
pulmonary vascular resistance index
Qs/Qt:
venous admixture
RAP:
right atrial pressure
ST:
single thermodilution.
Declarations
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Professor Anton Hauge for critical review of the manuscript and Mrs Alexandra Saab Bjertnaes, MBA, for linguistic advice.
Authors’ Affiliations
(1)
Research Fellow, Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tromsø
(2)
Professor, Chairman of the Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tromsø
Halperin BD, Feeley TW, Mihm FG, Chiles C, Guthaner DF, Blank NE: Evaluation of the portable chest roentgenogram for quantitating extravascular lung water in critically ill adults.Chest 1985, 88: 649-652.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Boussat S, Jacques T, Levy B, Laurent E, Gache A, Capellier G, Neidhardt A: Intravascular volume monitoring and extravascular lung water in septic patients with pulmonary edema.Intensive Care Med 2002, 28: 712-718. 10.1007/s00134-002-1286-6View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Pfeiffer UJ, Backus G, Blumel G, Eckart J, Muller P, Winkler P, Zeravik J, Zimmermann GJ: A fiberoptic-based system for integrated monitoring of cardiac output, intrathoracic blood volume, extravascular lung water, O2saturation, and a-v differences. In In Practical Applications of Fiberoptics in Critical Care Monitoring. Edited by: Lewis FR, Pfeiffer UJ. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer; 1990:114-125.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Sakka SG, Klein M, Reinhart K, Meier-Hellmann A: Prognostic value of extravascular lung water in critically ill patients.Chest 2002, 122: 2080-2086. 10.1378/chest.122.6.2080View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Roch A, Michelet P, Lambert D, Delliaux S, Saby C, Perrin G, Ghez O, Bregeon F, Thomas P, Carpentier JP, et al.: Accuracy of the double indicator method for measurement of extravascular lung water depends on the type of acute lung injury.Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 811-817. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000114831.59185.02View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Bock J, Lewis FR: Clinical relevance of lung water measurement with the thermal-dye dilution technique. In In Practical Applications of Fiberoptics in Critical Care Monitoring. Edited by: Lewis FR, Pfeiffer UJ. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer; 1990:129-139.Google Scholar
Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Kuklin VN, Bjertnaes LJ: Extravascular lung water assessed by thermal-dye dilution correlates with gravimetric technique [abstract].Intensive Care Med 2003,29(Suppl 1):S167.Google Scholar
Mitchell JP, Schuller D, Calandrino FS, Schuster DP: Improved outcome based on fluid management in critically ill patients requiring pulmonary artery catheterization.Am Rev Respir Dis 1992, 145: 990-998.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Neumann P: Extravascular lung water and intrathoracic blood volume: double versus single indicator dilution technique.Intensive Care Med 1999, 25: 216-219. 10.1007/s001340050819View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Sakka SG, Ruhl CC, Pfeiffer UJ, Beale R, McLuckie A, Reinhart K, Meier-Hellmann A: Assessment of cardiac preload and extravascular lung water by single transpulmonary thermodilution.Intensive Care Med 2000, 26: 180-187. 10.1007/s001340050043View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Katzenelson R, Perel A, Berkenstadt , Preisman H, Kogan S, Sternik L, Segal E: Accuracy of transpulmonary thermodilution versus gravimetric measurement of extravascular lung water.Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 1550-1554. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000130995.18334.8BView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Kirov M, Kuzkov V, Kuklin V, Waerhaug K, Bjertnaes L: Extravascular lung water assessed by transpulmonary single thermodilution and gravimetry in sheep [abstract].Intensive Care Med 2004, in press.Google Scholar
Julien M, Hoeffel JM, Flick MR: Oleic acid lung injury in sheep.J Appl Physiol 1986, 60: 433-440.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bjertnaes LJ, Koizumi T, Newman JH: Inhaled nitric oxide reduces lung fluid filtration after endotoxin in awake sheep.Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998, 158: 1416-1423.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Kuklin VN, Virag L, Pacher P, Southan GJ, Salzman AL, Szabo C, Bjertnaes LJ: Aerosolized linear polyethylenimine-nitric oxide/nucleophile adduct attenuates endotoxin-induced lung injury in sheep.Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002, 166: 1436-1442. 10.1164/rccm.2202021View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Bjertnaes LJ: Combination of intravenously infused methylene blue and inhaled nitric oxide ameliorates endotoxin-induced lung injury in awake sheep.Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 179-186. 10.1097/00003246-200301000-00028View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Rossi P, Oldner A, Wanecek M, Leksell LG, Rudehill A, Konrad D, Weitzberg E: Comparison of gravimetric and double-indicator technique for assessment of extravascular lung water in endotoxemia.Intensive Care Med 2003, 29: 460-466.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Selinger SL, Bland RD, Demling RH, Staub NC: Distribution volumes of [131I]albumin, [14C]sucrose, and36Cl in sheep lung.J Appl Physiol 1975, 39: 773-779.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Julien M, Flick MR, Hoeffel JM, Murray JF: Accurate reference measurement for postmortem lung water.J Appl Physiol 1984, 56: 248-253.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Peterson BT, Brooks JA, Zack AG: Use of microwave oven for determination of postmortem water volume of lungs.J Appl Physiol 1982, 52: 1661-1663.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg PR, Hansbrough JR, Anderson D, Schuster DP: A prospective study of lung water measurements during patient management in an intensive care unit.Am Rev Respir Dis 1987, 136: 662-668.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Kirov MY, Kuzkov VV, Waerhaug K, Kuklin VN, Bjertnaes LJ: Extravascular lung water correlates with acute lung injury and outcome in human septic shock [abstract].Acta Anaesth Scand 2003, 47: 31.Google Scholar
Nakazawa H, Noda H, Noshima S, Flynn JT, Traber LD, Herndon DN, Traber DL: Pulmonary transvascular fluid flux and cardiovascular function in sheep with chronic sepsis.J Appl Physiol 1993, 75: 2521-2528.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Groeneveld ABJ, Verheij J: Is pulmonary edema associated with a high extravascular thermal volume?Crit Care Med 2004, 32: 899-901. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000115246.59910.ABView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Neumann P, Berglund JE, Mondejar EF, Magnusson A, Hedenstierna G: Dynamics of lung collapse and recruitment during prolonged breathing in porcine lung injury.J Appl Physiol 1998, 85: 1533-1543.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Schuster DP: ARDS: clinical lessons from the oleic acid model of acute lung injury.Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994, 149: 245-260.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Stubbe HD, Westphal M, Van Aken H, Hucklenbruch C, Lauer S, Jahn UR, Hinder F: Inhaled nitric oxide reduces lung edema during fluid resuscitation in ovine acute lung injury.Intensive Care Med 2003, 29: 1790-1797. 10.1007/s00134-003-1790-3View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Mondejar E, Castano-Perez J, Rivera-Fernandez R, Colmenero-Ruiz M, Manzano F, Perez-Villares J, de la Chica R: Quantification of lung water by transpulmonary thermodilution in normal and edematous lung.J Crit Care 2003, 18: 253-258. 10.1016/j.jcrc.2003.10.009View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Chesnutt MS, Nuckton TJ, Golden J, Folkesson HG, Matthay MA: Rapid alveolar epithelial fluid clearance following lung lavage in pulmonary alveolar proteinosis.Chest 2001, 120: 271-274. 10.1378/chest.120.1.271View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is cited.
