Intraoperative fluid management in septic shock of abdominal origin guided by Fick´s formula vs ΔPCO2

Vania Romero; Rosa M. Flores; Hugo E. Meneses

doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20243347

Authors

Vania Romero Department of Anaesthesiology, Mexican Social Security Institute, Puebla, Mexico https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2791-0867
Rosa M. Flores Department of Anaesthesiology, Mexican Social Security Institute, Puebla, Mexico https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6852-5727
Hugo E. Meneses Department of Anaesthesiology, Mexican Social Security Institute, Puebla, Mexico https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6132-4103

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20243347

Keywords:

Septic shock, PCO2 Delta, Fick´s formula

Abstract

Background: In the main causes of morbidity and mortality in world is sepsis. Dynamic evaluations have more accurate predicting fluid response.

Methods: It has made an observational, comparative, prospective, longitudinal and unicentric study. We included both sexes with 30-75 years and diagnosis of septic shock secondary to abdominal surgical pathology requiring surgical intervention. The sample was 36 patients. Two groups were be integrated; one group will be managed with Fick's Formula and the other with ΔPCO2 with an equal number of participants in both groups, were aleatory, each group had 18 patients, three arterial and venous blood gas samples will be taken (pre-anesthetic, trans anesthetic and postanesthetic) to guide fluid management by means of cardiac output. Statistical analysis was made with, descriptive analysis for categorical variables with measures of central tendency and dispersion; inferential analysis for numerical variables with one-way Anova for comparison amount fluid administered guided by the formulas at the beginning, at a one hour and at the end of the surgical procedure subsequently Pearson's correlation was applied.

Results: When evaluating the amount of liquid administered in both groups by one-way ANOVA, no statistically significant difference was found, since the level of significance of both Fick's formula and ΔPCO2 in their three measurements is higher to 0.05. We found for both high correlation with Pearson.

Conclusions: There is no difference between the use of Fick´s formula or ΔPCO2. Regarding the liquids management, it is easier to apply ΔPCO2.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Yoon SH, Choi B, Eun S. Using the lactate-to-albumin ratio to predict mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2022;26(5):1743-52.

Coelembier C, Fellahi JC. Monitorización hemodinámica del paciente en cirugía no cardíaca. EMC Anest Reanim. 2020;46(3):1-15.

Choudhary R. Sepsis management, controversies, and advancement in nanotechnology: a systematic review. Cureus. 2022;14(2):22112.

Zhang Z, Zheng B, Liu N. Individualized fluid administration for critically ill patients with sepsis with an interpretable dynamic treatment regimen model. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):17874.

Nassar B, Badr M, van Grunderbeeck N. Central venous-to-arterial PCO2 difference as a marker to identify fluid responsiveness in septic shock. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):17256.

Roguin A. Adolf Eugen Fick (1829-1901): The man behind the cardiac output equation. Am J Cardiol. 2020;133:162–5.

Zhang Y, Ning BT. Signaling pathways and intervention therapies in sepsis. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2021;6(1):407.

Jiang S, Wu M, Lu X. Is restrictive fluid resuscitation beneficial not only for hemorrhagic shock but also for septic shock? Medicine (Baltimore). 2012;100(12):25143.

Riesbeck M, Kazemian P, Barn K, et al. A single center analysis of correlation of heartmate 3 lvad flows to indirect fick method derived by swan-ganz catheter. J Card Fail. 2022;28(5):88.

Mallat J, Vallet B. Ratio of venous-to-arterial PCO2 to arteriovenous oxygen content difference during regional ischemic or hypoxic hypoxia. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):10172.

Tusman G, Acosta CM, Wallin M. Perioperative Continuous Noninvasive Cardiac Output Monitoring in Cardiac Surgery Patients by a Novel Capnodynamic Method. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2022;36(8):2900-7.