Value of respiratory variation of aortic peak velocity in predicting children receiving mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Wang, Xiaoying; Jiang, Lulu; Liu, Shuai; Ge, Yali; Gao, Ju

doi:10.1186/s13054-019-2647-7

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 56 publications

(71 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Static measures, mostly CVP, are not appropriate to test fluid responsiveness [29,31]. The published evidence suggests that respiratory variation in aortic blood flow peak velocity {(ΔVPeak/velocity time integral (VTI)} is the most reliable indicator of fluid responsiveness, but only in ventilated children that fulfil various criteria [38]. Other dynamic methods, like passive leg raising test and liver pressure, have not been adequately assessed in children of all ages [39].…”

Section: Volume Resuscitation and Fluid Responsivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

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)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cardiovascular instability is common in critically ill children. There is a scarcity of published high-quality studies to develop meaningful evidence-based hemodynamic monitoring guidelines and hence, with the exception of management of shock, currently there are no published guidelines for hemodynamic monitoring in children. The European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) Cardiovascular Dynamics section aimed to provide expert consensus recommendations on hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children. Methods Creation of a panel of experts in cardiovascular hemodynamic assessment and hemodynamic monitoring and review of relevant literature—a literature search was performed, and recommendations were developed through discussions managed following a Quaker-based consensus technique and evaluating appropriateness using a modified blind RAND/UCLA voting method. The AGREE statement was followed to prepare this document. Results Of 100 suggested recommendations across 12 subgroups concerning hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children, 72 reached “strong agreement,” 20 “weak agreement,” and 2 had “no agreement.” Six statements were considered as redundant after rephrasing of statements following the first round of voting. The agreed 72 recommendations were then coalesced into 36 detailing four key areas of hemodynamic monitoring in the main manuscript. Due to a lack of published evidence to develop evidence-based guidelines, most of the recommendations are based upon expert consensus. Conclusions These expert consensus-based recommendations may be used to guide clinical practice for hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children, and they may serve as a basis for highlighting gaps in the knowledge base to guide further research in hemodynamic monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Volume Resuscitation and Fluid Responsivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

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)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Static measures, mostly CVP, are not appropriate to test uid responsiveness [29,31]. The published evidence suggests that respiratory variation in aortic blood ow peak velocity {(ΔVPeak / velocity time integral (VTI)} is the most reliable indicator of uid responsiveness, but only in ventilated children that ful l various criteria [38]. Other dynamic methods, like passive leg raising test and liver pressure, have not been adequately assessed in children of all ages [39].…”

Section: Volume Resuscitation and Uid Responsivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

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)

Singh

Villaescusa

Cruz

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cardiovascular instability is common in critically-ill children. There is scarcity of published high-quality studies to develop meaningful evidence-based hemodynamic monitoring guidelines and hence, with the exception of management of shock, currently there are no published guidelines for hemodynamic monitoring in children. The European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) Cardiovascular Dynamics section aimed to provide expert consensus recommendations on hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children.Methods: Creation of a panel of experts in cardiovascular hemodynamic assessment and hemodynamic monitoring and review of relevant literature - a literature search was performed, and recommendations were developed through discussions managed following a Quaker-based consensus technique and evaluating appropriateness using a modified blind RAND/UCLA voting method. The AGREE statement was followed to prepare this document.Results: Of 100 suggested recommendations across 12 subgroups concerning hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children, 72 reached “strong agreement”, 20 “weak agreement” and 2 had “no agreement”. Six statements were considered as redundant after rephrasing of statements following first round of voting. The agreed 72 recommendations were then coalesced into 36 detailing four key areas of hemodynamic monitoring in the main manuscript. Due to lack of published evidence to develop evidence-based guidelines, most of the recommendations are based upon expert consensus.Conclusions: These expert consensus-based recommendation may be used to guide clinical practice for hemodynamic monitoring in critically-ill children and they may serve as a basis for highlighting gaps in the knowledge base to guide further research in hemodynamic monitoring.

show abstract

“…Static measures, mostly CVP, are not appropriate to test uid responsiveness [37,39] and we therefore do not recommend uid bolus or therapy based on these static measures. The published evidence suggests that respiratory variation in aortic blood ow peak velocity {(ΔVPeak / velocity time integral (VTI)} is the most reliable indicator of uid responsiveness, but only in ventilated children that ful l various criteria [61]. Other dynamic methods, like passive leg raising test and liver pressure, have not been adequately assessed in children of all ages [62].…”

Section: Volume Resuscitation and Uid Responsivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

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)

Singh

Villaescusa

Cruz

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cardiovascular instability is common in critically-ill children. There is scarcity of published high-quality studies to develop meaningful evidence-based hemodynamic monitoring guidelines and hence, with the exception of management of shock, currently there are no published guidelines for hemodynamic monitoring in children. The European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) Cardiovascular Dynamics section aimed to provide expert consensus recommendations on hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children. Methods Creation of a panel of experts in cardiovascular hemodynamic assessment and hemodynamic monitoring and review of relevant literature - a literature search was performed, and recommendations were developed through discussions managed following a Quaker-based consensus technique and evaluating appropriateness using a modified blind RAND/UCLA voting method. The AGREE statement was followed to prepare this document. Results Of 100 suggested recommendations across 12 subgroups concerning hemodynamic monitoring in critically ill children, 72 reached “strong agreement”, 20 “weak agreement” and 2 had “no agreement”. Six statements were considered as redundant after rephrasing of statements following first round of voting. Due to lack of published evidence to develop evidence-based guidelines, most of the recommendations are based upon expert consensus. Conclusions These expert consensus-based recommendation may be used to guide clinical practice for hemodynamic monitoring in critically-ill children and they may serve as a basis for highlighting gaps in the knowledge base to guide further research in hemodynamic monitoring.

show abstract

Value of respiratory variation of aortic peak velocity in predicting children receiving mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 19 publications

References 56 publications

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)

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)

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)

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)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About