Skip to content


  • Poster presentation
  • Open Access

The value of pulse pressure variation to predict volume response in patients ventilated with low VT

  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Critical Care201014 (Suppl 1) :P116

  • Published:


  • Catheter
  • Pancreatitis
  • Liver Transplant
  • Acute Pancreatitis
  • Tidal Volume


The prediction value of pulse pressure variation (ΔPP) in patients ventilated with low VT is not well studied. A ΔPP of 12 to 13% is validated as a predictor of volume response in several studies, but in patients ventilated with VT >8 ml/kg. One study has shown that the ΔPP of 12 to 13% does not predict volume response in patients ventilated with a low VT. We hypothesized that a lower cut-off value for ΔPP can predict volume response in patients with low VT.


Thirty-seven adult patients mechanically ventilated with a tidal volume <8 ml/kg (PBW), without cardiac arrhythmias, with a pulmonary artery catheter and a peripheral arterial catheter were included. An increase in cardiac index (thermodilution)) >15% output after a fluid challenge (Crystalloid 1,000 ml or Colloid 500 ml) was considered a positive response.


Seventeen patients were responders. The ROC curve showed that the best cut-off value for ΔPP was 10% (ROC area = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.9; sensitivity 53%, specificity 95%, positive likelihood ratio 9.4 and negative 0.34). Twelve patients consisted of a heterogeneous group of patients (liver transplant, acute pancreatitis, aortic surgery). Among 25 septic shock patients, a ΔPP >10% showed a ROC area of 0.84 (sensitivity 78%, specificity 93%). In any case, the greater ΔPP, the greater the fluid response. ΔPP >10% was a better predictor than CVP or PAOP.


ΔPP has a limited value in patients ventilated with low VT. However, a ΔPP >10% may help identify septic shock patients that will respond to a fluid challenge.

Authors’ Affiliations

Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil


  1. Vincent JL, et al: Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: Influence of tidal volume. Intensive Care Med. 2005, 31: 517-523. 10.1007/s00134-005-2586-4.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar


© BioMed Central Ltd. 2010