Does pulse pressure variation predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yang, Xiaobo; Du, Bin

doi:10.1186/s13054-014-0650-6

Critical Care

Table 2 Selected methodological characteristics of included studies

From: Does pulse pressure variation predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Order	Authors	Year	Vt (ml/kg)	Body weight	Spontaneous breathing	Respiratory rate (times/minute)	Cardiac arrhythmia	Infusion fluid	Infusion volume	Infusion time (minutes)	Indices	Method for indices	Cutoff value (%)
1	Michard and colleagues [23]	2000	8 to 12	NA	No	NA	No	6% HES	500 ml	30	CI	PAC	15
2	Kramer and colleagues [24]	2004	8 to 10	NA	No	NA	No	Blood	500 ml	10 to 15	CO	PAC	12
3	Feissel and colleagues [25]	2005	8 to 10	NA	No	NA	No	6% HES	7 ml/kg	30	CI	Echo	15
4	Charron and colleagues [26]	2006	6 to 10	NA	No	14 to 20	No	6% HES	100 ml	1	SV	Echo	15
5	Monnet and colleagues [27]	2006	NA	NA	No	23 ± 5	No	Saline	500 ml	10	Aortic blood flow	Esophageal Doppler	15
6	Feissel and colleagues [28]	2007	8 to 10	NA	No	NA	No	6% HES	8 ml/kg	30	CI	Echo	15
7	Wyffels and colleagues [29]	2007	8 to 10	NA	No	NA	No	6% HES	500 ml	20	CO	PAC	15
8	Auler and colleagues [30]	2008	8	NA	No	NA	No	LR	20 ml/kg	20	CI	PAC	15
9	Monge Garcia and colleagues [31]	2009	9	Ideal	No	18 to 20	No	6% HES	500 ml	30	SV	FloTrac	15
10	Vistisen and colleagues [32]	2009	8.1^a	Predicted	NA	14	No	6% HES	500 ml	45	CI	PAC	15
11	Loupec and colleagues [33]	2011	8 to 10	Predicted	No	NA	No	6% HES^b	500 ml	10	CO	Echo	15
12	Biais and colleagues [34]	2012	8 to 10	Predicted	No	16 ± 3^c	No	Saline	500 ml	15	SV	Echo	15
13	Cecconi and colleagues [35]	2012	8	Ideal	No	14	No	Colloid	250 ml	5	CO	LiDCO plus	15
14	Fellahi and colleagues [36]	2012	NA	NA	NA	12 ± 2	No	6% HES	500 ml	15	CI	PiCCO2	15
15	Khwannimit and colleagues [37]	2012	≥ 8	NA	No	NA	No	6% HES	500 ml	30	SV	FloTrac	15
16	Monnet and colleagues [38]	2012	8.8^d	Predicted	No	NA	No	Saline	500 ml	20	CI	PiCCO2	15
17	Monnet and colleagues [39]	2012	8.5^e	Predicted	No	NA	No	Saline	500 ml	30	CI	PiCCO2	15
18	Yazigi and colleagues [40]	2012	8	NA	No	12	No	6% HES	7 ml/kg	20	SV	PAC	15
19	Fischer and colleagues [41]	2013	8.6	NA	NA	NA^f	No	6% HES	500 ml	15	CI	PiCCO2	15
20	Fischer and colleagues [42]	2013	8.2	NA	No	NA^c	No	6% HES	500 ml	15	CI	PiCCO2	15
21	Ishihara and colleagues [43]	2013	≥ 8	Ideal	No	12 to 15	No	10% dextran	250 ml	20	CI	PiCCO	15
22	Monnet and colleagues [44]	2013	9	Predicted	No	NA	No	Saline	500 ml	30	CI	PiCCO2	15

CI, cardiac index; CO, cardiac output; Echo, echocardiography; HES, hydroxyethyl starch; LR, Ringer’s lactate; NA, not available; PAC, pulmonary artery catheter; SV, stroke volume; Vt, tidal volume. ^aMean Vt of 6.9 ml/kg actual body weight. ^bSome patients evaluated with passive leg raising test. ^cHeart rate/respiratory rate >3.6. ^dOnly mean Vt >8 ml/kg included. ^eMean Vt of 7.4 ml/kg for nonresponder. ^fHeart rate/respiratory rate = 5.7.

Back to article page

ISSN: 1364-8535

Contact us

Submission enquiries: journalsubmissions@springernature.com