Article Sidebar
Published:
Oct 11, 2023DOI:
10.4314/ahs.v23i3.52Keywords:
Article Details
While African Health Sciences has been freely accessible online there have been questions on whether it is Open Access or not. We wish to clearly state that indeed African Health Sciences is Open Access. There are key issues regarding Open Access needing clarification for avoidance of doubt:
- 1. Henceforth, papers in African Health Sciences will be published under the CC BY (Creative Commons Attribution License) 4.0 International. See details on https://creativecomons.org/)
- 2. The copyright owners or the authors grant the 3rd party (perpetually and in advance) the right to disseminate, reproduce, or use the research papers in part or in full, format/medium as long as:
- No substantive errors are introduced in the process
- Attribution of authorship and correct citation details are given
- The referencing details are not changed.
Should the papers be reproduced in part, this must be clearly stated.
- 3. The papers will be freely and universally accessible online in an easily readable format such as XML in at least one widely recognized open access repository such as PUBMED CENTRAL.
B. ABRIDGED LICENCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUTHORS AND African Health Sciences
I submitted my manuscript to African Health Sciences and would like to affirm that:
1.0 I am authorized by my co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
2.0 I guarantee, on behalf of self and co-authors:
- That the paper is original, and has not been published in any other peer-reviewed journal; nor is it under consideration by other journal (s). It does not infringe existing copyright or any other person’s rights
- That we are/I am the sole author(s) of the paper and with authority to enter into this agreement. My granting rights to African Health Sciences is not in breach of any other obligation
- That the paper contains nothing unlawful, or libelous. Nor anything that would constitute a breach of contract, confidence or commitment given to secrecy, if published
- That I/we have taken care to ensure the integrity of the article.
3.0 I and all co-authors, agree that the paper, if accepted for publication, shall be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. (see https://creativecommons.org/)
Main Article Content
Clinical value of CVP+VIVC in predicting fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock
Abstract
Objective: To explore the clinical value of central venous pressure (CVP) + inferior vena cava respiratory variability (VIVC) in fluid resuscitation in spontaneously breathing patients with septic shock.
Methods: In retrospective observational study, during October 2019 to December 2021, 145 patients with septic shock treated in our hospital were enrolled by the method of observational study. According to the change rate of cardiac output (△ CO) ≥15% or △ CO<15% after 30 minutes, they were assigned into volume-responsive and volume-unresponsive group depending early fluid resuscitation in sepsis. The clinical value of combination of CVP and VIVC in predicting fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock was compared.
Results: The CVP of the study group was higher at 12h and 24h after fluid resuscitation, and the VIVC level of the study group at 6h, 12h and 24h after fluid resuscitation was higher (P<0.05). Pearson correlation analysis indicated that CVP, and VIVC levels were noticeably correlated with fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock (P<0.05). The area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) of CVP for predicting fluid resuscitation in septic shock patients was 0.694 and the cut-off value was 0.932, the sensitivity was 46.9%, and the specificity was 87.5%. VIVC predicted fluid resuscitation in septic shock patients with an AUC of 0.776, which was a cut-off value of 0.688, a sensitivity of 50.0%, and a specificity of 90.0%. Combination of CVP and VIVC predicted fluid resuscitation in septic shock patients with an AUC of 0.948, which was a cut-off value of 1.420, a sensitivity of 90.6%, and a specificity of 87.5%.
Conclusion: Combination of CVP and VIVC may have a good effect on the evaluation of volume responsiveness in patients with septic shock, which is better than single CVP and VIVC. Combination of CVP and VIVC can be adopted to predict fluid responsiveness volume responsiveness in septic shock patients, which is of great significance for guiding clinical fluid responsiveness therapy.
Keywords: Septic shock; fluid resuscitation; CVP; VIVC.
