↓ Skip to main content

End-expiratory occlusion maneuver to predict fluid responsiveness in the intensive care unit: an echocardiographic study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
End-expiratory occlusion maneuver to predict fluid responsiveness in the intensive care unit: an echocardiographic study
Published in
Critical Care, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1938-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Delphine Georges, Hugues de Courson, Romain Lanchon, Musa Sesay, Karine Nouette-Gaulain, Matthieu Biais

Abstract

In mechanically ventilated patients, an increase in cardiac index during an end-expiratory-occlusion test predicts fluid responsiveness. To identify this rapid increase in cardiac index, continuous and instantaneous cardiac index monitoring is necessary, decreasing its feasibility at the bedside. Our study was designed to investigate whether changes in velocity time integral and in peak velocity obtained using transthoracic echocardiography during an end-expiratory-occlusion maneuver could predict fluid responsiveness. This single-center, prospective study included 50 mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. Velocity time integral and peak velocity were assessed using transthoracic echocardiography before and at the end of a 12-sec end-expiratory-occlusion maneuver. A third set of measurements was performed after volume expansion (500 mL of saline 0.9% given over 15 minutes). Patients were considered as responders if cardiac output increased by 15% or more after volume expansion. Twenty-eight patients were responders. At baseline, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, cardiac output, velocity time integral and peak velocity were similar between responders and non-responders. End-expiratory-occlusion maneuver induced a significant increase in velocity time integral both in responders and non-responders, and a significant increase in peak velocity only in responders. A 9% increase in velocity time integral induced by the end-expiratory-occlusion maneuver predicted fluid responsiveness with sensitivity of 89% (95% CI 72% to 98%) and specificity of 95% (95% CI 77% to 100%). An 8.5% increase in peak velocity induced by the end-expiratory-occlusion maneuver predicted fluid responsiveness with sensitivity of 64% (95% CI 44% to 81%) and specificity of 77% (95% CI 55% to 92%). The area under the receiver operating curve generated for changes in velocity time integral was significantly higher than the one generated for changes in peak velocity (0.96 ± 0.03 versus 0.70 ± 0.07, respectively, P = 0.0004 for both). The gray zone ranged between 6 and 10% (20% of the patients) for changes in velocity time integral and between 1 and 13% (62% of the patients) for changes in peak velocity. In mechanically ventilated and sedated patients in the neuro Intensive Care Unit, changes in velocity time integral during a 12-sec end-expiratory-occlusion maneuver were able to predict fluid responsiveness and perform better than changes in peak velocity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Postgraduate 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 7 8%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 21 25%
Unknown 22 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Computer Science 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 28 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,863,233
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,665
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,151
of 447,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#60
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,797 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.