Download PDF
J Pediatr Intensive Care
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1771347
Review Article

Assessing Fluid Responsiveness Using Noninvasive Hemodynamic Monitoring in Pediatric Shock: A Review

Nikhil R. Shah 
1   Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, United States
,
Radha B. Patel
2   University of the Incarnate Word School of Osteopathic Medicine, San Antonio, Texas, United States
,
Pranali Awadhare
3   Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Driscoll Children's Hospital, Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
,
Tracy McCallin
4   Department of Pediatrics, University Hospitals Rainbow Babies & Children's Hospital, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
,
Utpal S. Bhalala
1   Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, United States
3   Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Driscoll Children's Hospital, Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
5   Department of Critical Care, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring devices have been introduced to better quantify fluid responsiveness in pediatric shock; however, current evidence for their use is inconsistent. This review aims to examine available noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring techniques for assessing fluid responsiveness in children with shock. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar, examining published studies until December 31, 2022. Articles were identified using initial keywords: [noninvasive] AND [fluid responsiveness]. Inclusion criteria included age 0 to 18, use of noninvasive techniques, and the emergency department (ED) or pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) settings. Abstracts, review papers, articles investigating intraoperative monitoring, and non-English studies were excluded. The methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) score was used to assess impact of study bias and all study components were aligned with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Our review yielded 1,353 articles, 17 of which met our inclusion criteria, consisting of 618 patients. All were prospective observational studies performed in the ED (n = 3) and PICU (n = 14). Etiologies of shock were disclosed in 13/17 papers and consisted of patients in septic shock (38%), cardiogenic shock (29%), and hypovolemic shock (23%). Noninvasive hemodynamic monitors included transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) (n = 10), ultrasonic cardiac output monitor (USCOM) (n = 1), inferior vena cava ultrasonography (n = 2), noninvasive cardiac output monitoring (NICOM)/electrical cardiometry (n = 5), and >2 modalities (n = 1). To evaluate fluid responsiveness, most commonly examined parameters included stroke volume variation (n = 6), cardiac index (CI) (n = 6), aortic blood flow peak velocity (∆V peak) (n = 3), and change in stroke volume index (n = 3). CI increase >10% predicted fluid responsiveness by TTE in all ages; however, when using NICOM, this increase was only predictive in children >5 years old. Additionally, ∆SV of 10 to 13% using TTE and USCOM was deemed predictive, while no studies concluded distensibility index by transabdominal ultrasound to be significantly predictive. Few articles explore implications of noninvasive hemodynamic monitors in evaluating fluid responsiveness in pediatric shock, especially in the ED setting. Consensus about their utility remains unclear, reiterating the need for further investigations of efficacy, accuracy, and applicability of these techniques.

Keywords

fluid responsiveness - shock - pediatric - children - noninvasive - hemodynamic monitoring


Publication History

Received: 18 February 2023

Accepted: 15 June 2023

Article published online:
28 July 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Richards JB, Wilcox SR. Diagnosis and management of shock in the emergency department. Emerg Med Pract 2014; 16 (03) 1-22 , quiz 22–23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Russell A, Rivers EP, Giri PC, Jaehne AK, Nguyen HB. A physiologic approach to hemodynamic monitoring and optimizing oxygen delivery in shock resuscitation. J Clin Med 2020; 9 (07) 2052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Tan B, Wong JJ, Sultana R. et al. Global case-fatality rates in pediatric severe sepsis and septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr 2019; 173 (04) 352-362 Erratum in: JAMA Pediatr. 2019 Apr 1;173(4):401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 de Souza DC, Machado FR. Epidemiology of pediatric septic shock. J Pediatr Intensive Care 2019; 8 (01) 3-10
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Singh Y, Villaescusa JU, da Cruz EM. et al. Recommendations for hemodynamic monitoring for critically ill children-expert consensus statement issued by the cardiovascular dynamics section of the European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC). Crit Care 2020; 24 (01) 620
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lee SJ, Ramar K, Park JG, Gajic O, Li G, Kashyap R. Increased fluid administration in the first three hours of sepsis resuscitation is associated with reduced mortality: a retrospective cohort study. Chest 2014; 146 (04) 908-915
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Paul R. Recognition, diagnostics, and management of pediatric severe sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department. Pediatr Clin North Am 2018; 65 (06) 1107-1118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sumbel L, Wats A, Salameh M, Appachi E, Bhalala U. Thoracic fluid content (TFC) measurement using impedance cardiography predicts outcomes in critically ill children. Front Pediatr 2021; 8: 564902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kelm DJ, Perrin JT, Cartin-Ceba R, Gajic O, Schenck L, Kennedy CC. Fluid overload in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock treated with early goal-directed therapy is associated with increased acute need for fluid-related medical interventions and hospital death. Shock 2015; 43 (01) 68-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Arikan AA, Zappitelli M, Goldstein SL, Naipaul A, Jefferson LS, Loftis LL. Fluid overload is associated with impaired oxygenation and morbidity in critically ill children. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2012; 13 (03) 253-258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Raina R, Sethi SK, Wadhwani N, Vemuganti M, Krishnappa V, Bansal SB. Fluid overload in critically ill children. Front Pediatr 2018; 6: 306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Huang M, Chen JF, Chen LY. et al. A comparison of two different fluid resuscitation management protocols for pediatric burn patients: a retrospective study. Burns 2018; 44 (01) 82-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Carcillo JA, Tasker RC. Fluid resuscitation of hypovolemic shock: acute medicine's great triumph for children. Intensive Care Med 2006; 32 (07) 958-961
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Davis AL, Carcillo JA, Aneja RK. et al. American College of Critical Care Medicine clinical practice parameters for hemodynamic support of pediatric and neonatal septic shock. Crit Care Med 2017; 45 (06) 1061-1093
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Marik PE, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. Ann Intensive Care 2011; 1 (01) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gelbart B, Glassford NJ, Bellomo R. Fluid bolus therapy-based resuscitation for severe sepsis in hospitalized children: a systematic review. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2015; 16 (08) e297-e307
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ranjit S, Natraj R, Kissoon N, Thiagarajan RR, Ramakrishnan B, Monge García MI. Variability in the hemodynamic response to fluid bolus in pediatric septic shock. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2021; 22 (08) e448-e458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Weiss SL, Peters MJ, Alhazzani W. et al. Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children. Intensive Care Med 2020; 46 (Suppl. 01) 10-67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Nicklas JY, Saugel B. Non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring for hemodynamic management in perioperative medicine. Front Med (Lausanne) 2017; 4: 209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nowak RM, Nanayakkara P, DiSomma S. et al. Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring in emergency patients with suspected heart failure, sepsis and stroke: the PREMIUM registry. West J Emerg Med 2014; 15 (07) 786-794
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Marik PE. Noninvasive cardiac output monitors: a state-of the-art review. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2013; 27 (01) 121-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nguyen LS, Squara P. Non-invasive monitoring of cardiac output in critical care medicine. Front Med (Lausanne) 2017; 4: 200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372 (71) n71
    Google Scholar
  • 24 King MR, Anderson TA, Sui J, He G, Poon KY, Coté CJ. Age-related incidence of desaturation events and the cardiac responses on stroke index, cardiac index, and heart rate measured by continuous bioimpedance noninvasive cardiac output monitoring in infants and children undergoing general anesthesia. J Clin Anesth 2016; 32: 181-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 2003; 73 (09) 712-716
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Lee JY, Kim JY, Choi CH, Kim HS, Lee KC, Kwak HJ. The ability of stroke volume variation measured by a noninvasive cardiac output monitor to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated children. Pediatr Cardiol 2014; 35 (02) 289-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A. et al; Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including the Pediatric Subgroup. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med 2013; 41 (02) 580-637
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Haque IU, Zaritsky AL. Analysis of the evidence for the lower limit of systolic and mean arterial pressure in children. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2007; 8 (02) 138-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kim YA, Ha EJ, Jhang WK, Park SJ. Early blood lactate area as a prognostic marker in pediatric septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2013; 39 (10) 1818-1823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Cruz AT, Perry AM, Williams EA, Graf JM, Wuestner ER, Patel B. Implementation of goal-directed therapy for children with suspected sepsis in the emergency department. Pediatrics 2011; 127 (03) e758-e766
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Sivarajan VB, Bohn D. Monitoring of standard hemodynamic parameters: heart rate, systemic blood pressure, atrial pressure, pulse oximetry, and end-tidal CO2. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2011; 12 (04) S2-S11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Lee JH, Kim EH, Jang YE, Kim HS, Kim JT. Fluid responsiveness in the pediatric population. Korean J Anesthesiol 2019; 72 (05) 429-440 Erratum in: Korean J Anesthesiol. 2019 Dec;72(6):624. Erratum in: Korean J Anesthesiol. 2021 Apr;74(2):188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Chaiyakulsil C, Chantra M, Katanyuwong P, Khositseth A, Anantasit N. Comparison of three non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring methods in critically ill children. PLoS One 2018; 13 (06) e0199203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Whitney R, Langhan M. Vascular access in pediatric patients in the emergency department: types of access, indications, and complications. Pediatr Emerg Med Pract 2017; 14 (06) 1-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Arnett AM, Fleisher GR. Insertion of long lines in the pediatric emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 1999; 15 (05) 318-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Chaney JC, Derdak S. Minimally invasive hemodynamic monitoring for the intensivist: current and emerging technology. Crit Care Med 2002; 30 (10) 2338-2345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Zhu G, Zhang K, Fu Y, Hu Z. Accuracy assessment of noninvasive cardiac output monitoring in the hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill patients. Ann Palliat Med 2020; 9 (05) 3506-3512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Beltramo F, Menteer J, Razavi A. et al. Validation of an ultrasound cardiac output monitor as a bedside tool for pediatric patients. Pediatr Cardiol 2016; 37 (01) 177-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Sumbel L, Nagaraju L, Ogbeifun H, Agarwal A, Bhalala U. Comparing cardiac output measurements using electrical cardiometry versus phase contrast cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Prog Pediatr Cardiol 2022; 66: 101551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Fathi EM, Narchi H, Chedid F. Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring of septic shock in children. World J Methodol 2018; 8 (01) 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 McLean JRL, Inwald DP. The utility of stroke volume variability as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in critically ill children: a pilot study. Intensive Care Med 2014; 40 (02) 288-289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Durand P, Chevret L, Essouri S, Haas V, Devictor D. Respiratory variations in aortic blood flow predict fluid responsiveness in ventilated children. Intensive Care Med 2008; 34 (05) 888-894
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Choi DY, Kwak HJ, Park HY, Kim YB, Choi CH, Lee JY. Respiratory variation in aortic blood flow velocity as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in children after repair of ventricular septal defect. Pediatr Cardiol 2010; 31 (08) 1166-1170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Jacquet-Lagrèze M, Tiberghien N, Evain JN. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of a calibrated abdominal compression to predict fluid responsiveness in children. Br J Anaesth 2018; 121 (06) 1323-1331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Lukito V, Djer MM, Pudjiadi AH, Munasir Z. The role of passive leg raising to predict fluid responsiveness in pediatric intensive care unit patients. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2012; 13 (03) e155-e160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 El-Nawawy AA, Farghaly PM, Hassouna HM. Accuracy of passive leg raising test in prediction of fluid responsiveness in children. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020; 24 (05) 344-349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Luo D, Dai W, Lei L, Cai X. The clinical value of passive leg raising plus ultrasound to predict fluid responsiveness in children after cardiac surgery. BMC Pediatr 2021; 21 (01) 243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 El-Nawawy AA, Omar OM, Hassouna HM. Role of inferior vena cava parameters as predictors of fluid responsiveness in pediatric septic shock. J Child Sci 2021; 11: e49-e54
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Gaspar HA, Morhy SS, Lianza AC. et al. Focused cardiac ultrasound: a training course for pediatric intensivists and emergency physicians. BMC Med Educ 2014; 14: 25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Long E, Babl FE, Oakley E, Sheridan B, Duke T. Pediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT). Cardiac index changes with fluid bolus therapy in children with sepsis-an observational study. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2018; 19 (06) 513-518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Chong SW, Peyton PJ. A meta-analysis of the accuracy and precision of the ultrasonic cardiac output monitor (USCOM). Anaesthesia 2012; 67 (11) 1266-1271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Zorko DJ, Choong K, Gilleland J. et al. Urgent ultrasound guided hemodynamic assessments by a pediatric medical emergency team: a pilot study. PLoS One 2013; 8 (06) e66951
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Dey I, Sprivulis P. Emergency physicians can reliably assess emergency department patient cardiac output using the USCOM continuous wave Doppler cardiac output monitor. Emerg Med Australas 2005; 17 (03) 193-199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Knirsch W, Kretschmar O, Tomaske M. et al. Cardiac output measurement in children: comparison of the ultrasound cardiac output monitor with thermodilution cardiac output measurement. Intensive Care Med 2008; 34 (06) 1060-1064
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Nguyen HB, Banta DP, Stewart G. et al. Cardiac index measurements by transcutaneous Doppler ultrasound and transthoracic echocardiography in adult and pediatric emergency patients. J Clin Monit Comput 2010; 24 (03) 237-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Wongsirimetheekul T, Khositseth A, Lertbunrian R. Non-invasive cardiac output assessment in critically ill paediatric patients. Acta Cardiol 2014; 69 (02) 167-173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Cheng YW, Xu F, Li J. Identification of volume parameters monitored with a noninvasive ultrasonic cardiac output monitor for predicting fluid responsiveness in children after congenital heart disease surgery. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018; 97 (39) e12289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Miao N, Yang J, Du Z. et al. Comparison of low molecular weight hydroxyethyl starch and human albumin as priming solutions in children undergoing cardiac surgery. Perfusion 2014; 29 (05) 462-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Li L, Li Y, Xu X. et al. Safety evaluation on low-molecular-weight hydroxyethyl starch for volume expansion therapy in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care 2015; 19 (01) 79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Jakovljevic DG, Trenell MI, MacGowan GA. Bioimpedance and bioreactance methods for monitoring cardiac output. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2014; 28 (04) 381-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Tomaske M, Knirsch W, Kretschmar O. et al; Working Group on Non-invasive Haemodynamic Monitoring in Paediatrics. Cardiac output measurement in children: comparison of Aesculon cardiac output monitor and thermodilution. Br J Anaesth 2008; 100 (04) 517-520
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Dunham CM, Chirichella TJ, Gruber BS. et al. Emergency department noninvasive (NICOM) cardiac outputs are associated with trauma activation, patient injury severity and host conditions and mortality. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012; 73 (02) 479-485
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Vergnaud E, Vidal C, Verchère J. et al. Stroke volume variation and indexed stroke volume measured using bioreactance predict fluid responsiveness in postoperative children. Br J Anaesth 2015; 114 (01) 103-109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Sanders M, Servaas S, Slagt C. Accuracy and precision of non-invasive cardiac output monitoring by electrical cardiometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Monit Comput 2020; 34 (03) 433-460
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Blohm ME, Obrecht D, Hartwich J. et al. Impedance cardiography (electrical velocimetry) and transthoracic echocardiography for non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in pediatric intensive care patients: a prospective single-center observational study. Crit Care 2014; 18 (06) 603
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Suehiro K, Joosten A, Murphy LS. et al. Accuracy and precision of minimally-invasive cardiac output monitoring in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Monit Comput 2016; 30 (05) 603-620
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Awadhare P, Patel R, McCallin T. et al. Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring and assessment of fluid responsiveness in children with shock in the emergency department. Front Pediatr 2022; 10: 857106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Rao SS, Lalitha AV, Reddy M, Ghosh S. Electrocardiometry for hemodynamic categorization and assessment of fluid responsiveness in pediatric septic shock: a pilot observational study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021; 25 (02) 185-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Lu GP, Yan G, Chen Y, Lu ZJ, Zhang LE, Kissoon N. The passive leg raise test to predict fluid responsiveness in children–preliminary observations. Indian J Pediatr 2015; 82 (01) 5-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Gupta D, Dhingra S. Electrocardiometry fluid responsiveness in pediatric septic shock. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021; 25 (02) 123-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Gan H, Cannesson M, Chandler JR, Ansermino JM. Predicting fluid responsiveness in children: a systematic review. Anesth Analg 2013; 117 (06) 1380-1392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Barbier C, Loubières Y, Schmit C. et al. Respiratory changes in inferior vena cava diameter are helpful in predicting fluid responsiveness in ventilated septic patients. Intensive Care Med 2004; 30 (09) 1740-1746
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Feissel M, Michard F, Faller JP, Teboul JL. The respiratory variation in inferior vena cava diameter as a guide to fluid therapy. Intensive Care Med 2004; 30 (09) 1834-1837
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Evans D, Ferraioli G, Snellings J, Levitov A. Volume responsiveness in critically ill patients: use of sonography to guide management. J Ultrasound Med 2014; 33 (01) 3-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Mercolini F, Di Leo V, Bordin G. et al. Central venous pressure estimation by ultrasound measurement of inferior vena cava and aorta diameters in pediatric critical patients: an observational study. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2021; 22 (01) e1-e9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Long E, Duke T, Oakley E, O'Brien A, Sheridan B, Babl FE. Pediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT). Does respiratory variation of inferior vena cava diameter predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously ventilating children with sepsis. Emerg Med Australas 2018; 30 (04) 556-563
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Weber T, Wagner T, Neumann K, Deusch E. Low predictability of three different noninvasive methods to determine fluid responsiveness in critically ill children. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2015; 16 (03) e89-e94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Renner J, Gruenewald M, Meybohm P. et al. Effect of elevated PEEP on dynamic variables of fluid responsiveness in a pediatric animal model. Paediatr Anaesth 2008; 18 (12) 1170-1177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Orso D, Paoli I, Piani T, Cilenti FL, Cristiani L, Guglielmo N. Accuracy of ultrasonographic measurements of inferior vena cava to determine fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Intensive Care Med 2020; 35 (04) 354-363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Varela JE, Hinojosa M, Nguyen N. Correlations between intra-abdominal pressure and obesity-related co-morbidities. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2009; 5 (05) 524-528
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Frezza EE, Shebani KO, Robertson J, Wachtel MS. Morbid obesity causes chronic increase of intraabdominal pressure. Dig Dis Sci 2007; 52 (04) 1038-1041
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Taniguchi T, Ohtani T, Nakatani S. et al. Impact of body size on inferior vena cava parameters for estimating right atrial pressure: a need for standardization?. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015; 28 (12) 1420-1427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar