The Diagnosis and Hemodynamic Monitoring of Circulatory Shock: Current and Future Trends

Open access

Abstract

Circulatory shock is a complex clinical syndrome encompassing a group of conditions that can arise from different etiologies and presented by several different hemodynamic patterns. If not corrected, cell dysfunction, irreversible multiple organ insufficiency, and death may occur. The four basic types of shock, hypovolemic, cardiogenic, obstructive and distributive, have features similar to that of hemodynamic shock. It is therefore essential, when monitoring hemodynamic shock, to making accurate clinical assessments which will guide and dictate appropriate management therapy. The European Society of Intensive Care has recently made recommendations for monitoring hemodynamic shock. The present paper discusses the issues raised in the new statements, including individualization of blood pressure targets, prediction of fluid responsiveness, and the use of echocardiography as the first means during the initial evaluation of circulatory shock. Also, the place of more invasive hemodynamic monitoring techniques and future trends in hemodynamic and metabolic monitoring in circulatory shock, will be debated.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Antonelli M Levy M Andrews PJ et al. Hemodynamic monitoring in shock and implications for management. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:575-90.

  • 2. Cecconi M De Backer D Antonelli M et al. Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 2014;40:1795-815.

  • 3. Vincent JL Rhodes A Perel A et al. Clinical review: Update on hemodynamic monitoring - a consensus of 16. Crit Care. 2011;15:229.

  • 4. Vincent JL Pelosi P Pearse R et al. Perioperative cardiovascular monitoring of high-risk patients: a consensus of 12. Crit Care. 2015;19:224.

  • 5. Herget-Rosenthal S Saner F Chawla L S. Approach to hemodynamic shock and vasopressors. J Am SocNephrol. 2008;3:546-53.

  • 6. Bone RC Balk RA Cerra FB et al. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Conference: definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. Crit Care Med. 1992;20:864-74.

  • 7. Singer M Deutschman CS Seymour CW et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315:801-10.

  • 8. Shankar-Hari M Phillips GS Levy ML et al. Developing a New Definition and Assessing New Clinical Criteria for Septic Shock: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315:775-87.

  • 9. Finfer S Vincent JL De Backer D. Circulatory Shock. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1726-34.

  • 10. Vincent JL Sakr Y Sprung CL et al. Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients I. Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:344-53.

  • 11. Sakka SG Klein M Reinhart K Meier-Hellmann A. Prognostic value of extravascular lung water in critically ill patients. Chest. 2002;122:2080-6.

  • 12. Martin GS Mannino DM Eaton S Moss M. The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1546-54.

  • 13. Jawad I Lukšić I Rafnsson SB. Assessing available information on the burden of sepsis: global estimates of incidence prevalence and mortality. J Glob Health. 2012;2:010404.

  • 14. Goldberg RJ Spencer FA Gore JM Lessard D Yarzebski J. Thirty- Year Trends (1975 to 2005) in the Magnitude of Management of and Hospital Death Rates Associated With Cardiogenic Shock in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction A Population- Based Perspective. Circulation. 2009;119:1211-9.

  • 15. Awad HH Anderson FA Jr Gore JM Goodman SG Goldberg RJ. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndromes: insights from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events. Am Heart J. 2012;163:963-71.

  • 16. Kauvar DS Wade CE. The epidemiology and modern management of traumatic hemorrhage: US and international perspectives. Crit Care. 2005;9:S1-9.

  • 17. Zenati MS Billiar TR Townsend RN Peitzman AB Harbrecht BG. A brief episode of hypotension increases mortality in critically ill trauma patients. J Trauma. 2002;53:232-6.

  • 18. Rivers EP Kruse JA Jacobsen G et al. The influence of early hemodynamic optimization on biomarker patterns of severe sepsis and septic shock. Critical Care Medicine. 2007;35:2016-24.

  • 19. Mikkelsen ME Miltiades AN Gaieski DF et al. Serum lactate is associated with mortality in severe sepsis independent of organ failure and shock. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1670-7.

  • 20. Wacharasint P Nakada TA Boyd JH Russell JA Walley KR. Normal-range blood lactate concentration in septic shock is prognostic and predictive. Shock. 2012;38:4-10.

  • 21. Rivers E Nguyen B Havstad S et al. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1368-77.

  • 22. Rödig G Prasser C Keyl C Liebold A Hobbhahn J. Continuous cardiac output measurement: pulse contour analysis vsthermodilution technique in cardiac surgical patients. Br J Anaesth. 1999;82: 525-30.

  • 23. Bendjelid K Marx G Kiefer N et al. Performance of a new pulse contour method for continuous cardiac output monitoring: validation in critically ill patients. Br J Anaesth. 2013;aet116.

  • 24. Chung FT Lin SM Lin SY Lin HC. Impact of extravascular lung water index on outcomes of severe sepsis patients in a medical intensive care unit. Respir Med. 2008;102:956-61.

  • 25. Michard F Alaya S Zarka V Bahloul M Richard C Teboul JL. Global end-diastolic volume as an indicator of cardiac preload in patients with septic shock. Chest. 2003;124:1900-8.

  • 26. Spöhr F Hettrich P Bauer H Haas U Martin E Böttiger BW. Comparison of two methods for enhanced continuous circulatory monitoring in patients with septic shock. Intensive care med. 2007;33:1805-10.

  • 27. Zhang Z Xu X Yao M Chen H Ni H Fan H. Use of the PiCCO system in critically ill patients with septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14:1.

  • 28. Mirea L Ungureanu R Pavelescu D Grintescu I. Global enddiastolic volume: a better indicator of cardiac preload in patients with septic shock. Critical Care. 2015;19:P179.

  • 29. Madhusudan P Tirupakuzhi Vijayaraghavan BK Cove ME. Fluid resuscitation in sepsis: reexamining the Paradigm. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:984082.

  • 30. KDIGO (2012) Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Kidney Injury Section 2: AKI Definition. Kidney Int Suppl 2012;2:19-36.

  • 31. Cannesson M. Arterial pressure variation and goal-directed fluid therapy. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2010;24:487-97.

  • 32. Michard F Teboul JL. Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients: a critical analysis of the evidence. Chest. 2002;121:2000-8.

  • 33. Guyton AC Jones CE Coleman TG. Circulatory physiology: cardiac output and its regulation. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company. 1973 pp.135-47.

  • 34. Magder S De Varennes B. Clinical death and the measurement of stressed vascular volume. Crit Care Med. 1998;26:1061-4.

  • 35. Kumar A Anel R Bunnell E et al. Pulmonary artery occlusion pressure and central venous pressure fail to predict ventricular filling volume cardiac performance or the response to volume infusion in normal subjects. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:691-9.

  • 36. Osman D Ridel C Ray P et al. Cardiac filling pressures are not appropriate to predict hemodynamic response to volume challenge. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:64-8.

  • 37. Marik PE Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:1774-81.

  • 38. Perel A. Assessing fluid responsiveness by the systolic pressure variation in mechanically ventilated patients. Systolic pressure variation as a guide to fluid therapy in patients with sepsisinduced hypotension. Anesthesiology. 1998;89:1309-10.

  • 39. Berkenstadt H Margalit N Hadan M et al. Stroke Volume Variation as a Predictor of Fluid Responsiveness in Patients Undergoing Brain Surgery. Anesth Analg. 2001;92:984-9.

  • 40. Preisman S Kogan S Berkenstadt H Perel A. Predicting fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: functional haemodynamic parameters including the Respiratory Systolic Variation Test and static preload indicators. Br J Anaesth. 2005;95:746-55.

  • 41. Biais M Ehrmann S Mari A et al. Clinical relevance of pulse pressure variations for predicting fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients: the grey zone approach. Crit Care. 2014;18:587.

  • 42. Monnet X Teboul JL. Passive leg rising. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34:659-63.

  • 43. Teboul JL Monnet X. Prediction of volume responsiveness in critically ill patients with spontaneous breathing activity. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2008;14:334-9.

  • 44. Magder S Georgiadis G Cheong T. Respiratory variations in right atrial pressure predict the response to fluid challenge. J Crit Care. 1992;7:76-85.

  • 45. Reeves ST Finley AC Skubas NJ et al. Basic perioperative transesophageal echocardiography examination: a consensus statement of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013;26:443-56.

  • 46. Perrino AC JR Harris SN Luther MA. Intraoperative determination of cardiac output using multiplanetransesophageal echocardiography: a comparison to thermodilution. Anesthesiology. 1998;89:350-7.

  • 47. Vieillard-Baron A Chergui K Rabiller A et al. Superior vena caval collapsibility as a gauge of volume status in ventilated septic patients. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30:1734-9.

  • 48. Charron C Caille V Jardin F Vieillard-Baron A. Echocardiographic measurement of fluid responsiveness. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2006;12:249-54.

  • 49. Cioccari L Baur HR Berger D Wiegand J Takala J Merz TM. Hemodynamic assessment of critically ill patients using a miniaturized transesophageal echocardiography probe. Crit Care. 2013;17:R121.

  • 50. Vieillard-Baron A Slama M Mayo P et al. A pilot study on safety and clinical utility of a single-use 72-hour indwelling transesophageal echocardiography probe. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39:629-35.

  • 51. Cavarocchi NC Pitcher HT Yang Q et al. Weaning of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation using continuous hemodynamic transesophageal echocardiography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;146:1474-9.

  • 52. Maltais S Costello WT Billings FT et al. Episodic monoplane transesophageal echocardiography impacts postoperative management of the cardiac surgery patient. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2013;27:665-9.

  • 53. Krishnan S Ngai J Schlame M Rabinowitz L. 276: Comparison of Htee and Swan-Ganz Catheter for the Evaluation of Volume Status in Patients Status Post AVR. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:1-328.

  • 54. Puskarich MA Trzeciak S Shapiro NI et al. Whole blood lactate kinetics in patients undergoing quantitative resuscitation for severe sepsis and septic shock. Chest. 2013;143:1548-53.

  • 55. Pölönen P Ruokonen E Hippeläinen M Pöyhönen M Takala J. A prospective randomized study of goal-oriented hemodynamic therapy in cardiac surgical patients. Anesth Analg. 2000;90:1052-9.

  • 56. Jones AE Shapiro NI Trzeciak S Arnold RC Claremont HA Kline JA. Lactate clearance vs central venous oxygen saturation as goals of early sepsis therapy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2010;303:739-46.

  • 57. Sánchez M García-de-Lorenzo A Herrero E et al. A protocol for resuscitation of severe burn patients guided by transpulmonarythermodilution and lactate levels: a 3-year prospective cohort study. Crit Care. 2013;17:R176.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1038 499 13
PDF Downloads 470 271 21