Mini Fluid chAlleNge and End-expiratory Occlusion Test and to Assess flUid responsiVEness in opeRating Room

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

103 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-02-27

Study Completion Date

2020-01-16

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

End-expiratory occlusion test (EEOT) has been previously successfully tested in surgical patients, consisting of the interruption of the mechanical ventilation for 30 seconds, and in the evaluation of the changes in the SV.

The mini fluid challenge test (mFC) aims at testing the increase in SV after the rapid administration of a small aliquot of the predefined FC.

Both these test have been previously evaluated in small-sized studies and never compared each other.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Fluid Challenge Infusion and Response

NCT03810118

Neurosurgery Cardiovascular System Anesthesia, General

COMPLETED NA

"Mini Fluid Challenge Assessment: a Comparison Among Three Hemodynamic Tools"

NCT04934943

Sepsis Shock, Septic Critically Ill

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Hemodynamic Response to the End-expiratory Occlusion Test to Titrate Fluid Challenge in Operating Room.

NCT06627907

Fluid Responsiveness Predictability

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

End-expiratory Occlusion Test and Lung Recruitment Maneuver to Assess Fluid responsiVeness In Surgical Patients

NCT03820440

Hemodynamic Instability Surgery Fluid Overload

UNKNOWN NA

Whether a Minimal Volume Could Predict Fluid Responsiveness Using Thermodilution by PAC in Septic Shock Patients

NCT04515511

Septic Shock Hemodynamic Instability Fluid Therapy

UNKNOWN NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Targeted fluid therapy has received increasing attention in the management of patients showing acute circulatory failure in both intensive care unit (ICU) and operating room (OR), aiming at preventing both inadequate tissue blood flow and fluid overload \[1\]. In fact, unnecessary fluid administration can increase morbidity and mortality and length of hospital stay of critically ill and surgical patients \[2-10\].

Since the only physiological reason to give a fluid challenge (FC) is to increase the stroke volume (SV) \[11-13\] and this effect is obtained only in about 50% of ICU and OR patients \[14, 15\], a vast literature investigated the possibility of predict this effect before FC administration, but the issue remains extremely challenging \[1, 13, 16-18\]. Bedside clinical signs and pressure and static volumetric static variables, do not predict fluid responsiveness \[17\]. Moreover, several physiological factors affect the reliability of the ventilator-induced dynamic changes in pulse pressure and stroke volume \[pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume (SV) variation (SVV), respectively\], and their echographic surrogates, in a significant number of ICU and OR patients \[19-22\].

To overcome these limitations, the functional hemodynamic assessment (i.e. the assessment of the dynamic interactions of hemodynamic variables in response to a defined perturbation), of fluid responsiveness has gained in popularity \[17, 18, 23\]. A functional hemodynamic test (FHT) consist in a manoeuvre determining a sudden change in cardiac function and/or heart lung interaction, affecting the hemodynamics of fluid responders and non-responders to a different extent \[17, 18, 23\].

The FHT called passive leg raising (PLR) has been successfully used for assessing the fluid responsiveness in ICU patients since 2009 \[24\] and its reliability has been confirmed by three large meta-analyses \[25-27\]. However, the PLR is not usually practicable in the OR.

A lot of different FHTs have been proposed, as alternative to the PLR, in ICU and, more recently, OR. These tests could be basically subdivided in two groups. A subgroup of FHTs is based on sudden and brief variations of the mechanical ventilation to induce a change in right ventricle preload and/or after load and, as consequence, of left ventricle SV \[24, 28\]. Among these tests, the end-expiratory occlusion test (EEOT) has been previously successfully tested in surgical patients, consisting of the interruption of the mechanical ventilation for 30 seconds, and in the evaluation of the changes in the SV. A second subgroup aims at testing the increase in SV after the rapid administration of a small aliquot of the predefined FC \[29, 30\]. This test is called mini fluid challenge (mFC). Both these test have been previously evaluated in small-sized studies and never compared each other.

The primary aim of the present study is to compare the reliability of EEOT and mFC in predicting fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing general surgery.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Hemodynamic Instability Anesthesia Surgery

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NA

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

The study protocol was started during a period of intraoperative hemodynamic stability, as previously defined (i.e. change in mean arterial pressure of less than 10% during 5 minutes). The study protocol is was the following: 1) a set of measurements was recorded (T0) at a baseline ventilation of 7 ml/Kg and then the EEOT is performed by using the software function, "expiratory hold", to interrupt mechanical ventilation; 2) after one minute a set of measurements was recorded (T1); 3) the mFC is then performed; 4) a FC of overall 4 mL/Kg of crystalloid solution is infused over 9 minutes (T2). The attending anesthetist is allowed to interrupt the protocol at any stage for either hemodynamic instability or any other adverse effects requiring urgent treatment.

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Treatment - hemodynamic tests: EEOT and mFC

Interventions: all the enrolled patients will be tested using the EEOT and the mFC.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

End-expiratory occlusion test (EEOT)

Intervention Type DIAGNOSTIC_TEST

The EEOT is performed by interrupting the mechanical ventilation for 30 seconds, by using and end-expiratory hold on the ventilator.

mini fluid challenge (mFC)

Intervention Type OTHER

The mFC is performed by injecting a first aliquot of 100 ml of crystalloid over 1 minute before completing the 4 ml/kg-FC over the residual 9 minutes.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

End-expiratory occlusion test (EEOT)

The EEOT is performed by interrupting the mechanical ventilation for 30 seconds, by using and end-expiratory hold on the ventilator.

Intervention Type DIAGNOSTIC_TEST

mini fluid challenge (mFC)

The mFC is performed by injecting a first aliquot of 100 ml of crystalloid over 1 minute before completing the 4 ml/kg-FC over the residual 9 minutes.

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

All elective adults (age \> 18 years) consecutive patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery requiring invasive arterial monitoring and scheduled in those operating rooms equipped with ventilators having an expiratory-hold function.

Exclusion Criteria

The preoperative exclusion criteria were 1) any recurrent cardiac arrhythmia; 2) known reduced left (ejection fraction \< 30%) or right (systolic peak velocity of tricuspid annular motion \< 0.17 m/s) ventricular systolic function; Body Mass Index \> 35; 4) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease classified as GOLD ≥ 2. Once enrolled, the patient can be additionally excluded because of the occurrence of one of the following intraoperative conditions: 1) significant bleeding (more than 500 ml in ½ hour); 2) persistent and/or recurrent extrasystoles; 3) persistent low quality of the arterial signal despite optimization of the signal (see further).

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No