Feasibility and prognostic value of estimated plasma volume status in assessing volume status during early fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis.
10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20240729-00641
- Author:
Xiaodong LIU
1
,
2
;
Fei WANG
;
Wangbin XU
;
Man YANG
;
Xiao YANG
;
Dongmei DAI
;
Leyun XIAO-LI
;
Xinghui GUAN
;
Xiaoyang SU
;
Yuemeng CUI
;
Lei CAI
Author Information
1. Department of Intensive Care Unit, the First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming 650032, China. Corresponding author: Xu Wangbin, Email: xwbyn@
2. com.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Humans;
Prognosis;
Fluid Therapy;
Sepsis/physiopathology*;
Prospective Studies;
Plasma Volume;
Intensive Care Units;
Resuscitation;
Male;
Female;
Middle Aged;
Shock, Septic/therapy*
- From:
Chinese Critical Care Medicine
2025;37(7):620-627
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To investigate the feasibility and prognostic implications of assessing volume status during early fluid resuscitation in septic patients based on estimated plasma volume status (ePVS).
METHODS:A prospective study was conducted. Patients with sepsis admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) of the First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from March to December in 2023 were enrolled. The general information and laboratory indicators at ICU admission were recorded, and ePVS, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, acute physiology and chronic health status evaluation II (APACHE II) score were calculated. The vital signs, arterial blood gas analysis and volume status related indicators before liquid resuscitation (T0h) and 3 hours (T3h) and 6 hours (T6h) of fluid resuscitation were recorded. The diameter and variability of the inferior vena cava (IVC) were measured by ultrasound, and ePVS, percentage change value of estimated plasma volume status (ΔePVS%), difference in central venous-to-arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Pcv-aCO2), and lactate clearance rate (LCR) were calculated. Patients were divided into sepsis group and septic shock group based on the diagnosis at ICU admission, and septic patients were subdivided into survival group and death group based on their 28-day survival status. The differences in clinical data between the groups were compared. The correlation between ePVS or ΔePVS% and volume status related indicators during early liquid resuscitation was analyzed by Spearman rank sum correlation test. The predictive value of each variable for 28-day survival in patients with sepsis was analyzed by receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC curve), and 28-day death risk factors were analyzed by Logistic regression method.
RESULTS:Fifty-four septic patients were enrolled in the final analysis, including 17 with sepsis and 37 with septic shock; 34 survived at 28 days and 20 died, with a 28-day survival rate of 63.0%. Compared with the sepsis group, the septic shock group had a lower venous ePVS at ICU admission [dL/g: 4.96 (3.67, 7.15) vs. 7.55 (4.36, 10.07), P < 0.05]. Compared with the death group, the survival group had higher T6h arterial and venous ΔePVS%, and albumin [Alb; T6h arterial ΔePVS% (%): 11.57% (-1.82%, 31.35%) vs. 0.48% (-5.67%, 6.02%), T6h venous ΔePVS%: 9.62% (3.59%, 25.75%) vs. 1.52% (-9.65%, 7.72%), Alb (g/L): 27.57±4.15 vs. 23.77±6.97, all P < 0.05], lower SOFA score, APACHE II score, AST, T0h Lac, and T3h and T6h norepinephrine dosage [SOFA score: 9.00 (8.00, 10.00) vs. 11.50 (9.25, 14.50), APACHE II score: 18.00 (14.75, 21.25) vs. 25.50 (21.00, 30.00), AST (U/L): 34.09 (23.20, 56.64) vs. 79.24 (25.34, 196.59), T0h Lac (mmol/L): 1.75 (1.40, 2.93) vs. 3.25 (2.33, 5.30), norepinephrine dosage (mg): 0.98 (< 0.01, 3.10) vs. 4.60 (1.05, 8.55) at T3h, 1.82 (0.38, 5.30) vs. 8.20 (2.80, 17.73) at T6h, all P < 0.05]. While there were no significantly differences in other basic data and ePVS at all of the time points before and after resuscitation between the two groups. Correlation analysis showed that T6h venous ePVS was significantly positively correlated with T6h IVC variability in septic patients (r = 0.360, P < 0.05), T0h arterial ePVS was significantly negatively correlated with T3h and T6h liquid intake volume (r1 = -0.367, r2 = -0.280, both P < 0.05), and venous ePVS at ICU admission was significantly positively correlated with NT-proBNP at ICU admission (r = 0.409, P < 0.05). T6h venous ΔePVS% was significantly positively correlated with T3h liquid intake volume and T6h LCR (r1 = 0.286, r2 = 0.286, both P < 0.05), and significantly negatively correlated with T6h urine volume and T6h change value of Pcv-aCO2 (ΔPcv-aCO2; r1 = -0.321, r2 = -0.371, both P < 0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of T6h venous ΔePVS% for predicting 28-day survival in septic patients was 0.726 [95% confidence interval (95%CI) was 0.578-0.875, P = 0.006], with a sensitivity of 82.4%, a specificity of 60.0%, and an optimal cut-off value of 3.09%. Binary multifactorial Logistic regression analysis showed that an increase in T6h venous ΔePVS% was a protective factor for 28-day death in patients with sepsis on early fluid resuscitation [odds ratio (OR) = 0.900, 95%CI was 0.834-0.972, P = 0.007].
CONCLUSIONS:ePVS may have potential for assessing the volume status of septic patients during early fluid resuscitation. The ΔePVS% during early fluid resuscitation may help to identify septic patients with a poor prognosis.
