Article Sidebar
Published:
Nov 2, 2013Article Details
Issue
Section
Articles
By submitting manuscripts to SAJAA, authors of original articles are assigning copyright to the SA Society of Anaesthesiologists. Authors may use their own work after publication without written permission, provided they acknowledge the original source. Individuals and academic institutions may freely copy and distribute articles published in SAJAA for educational and research purposes without obtaining permission.
Main Article Content
The effect of positive end-expiratory pressure on pulse pressure variation
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the effect of different levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on pulse pressure variation (PPV).
Design: An observational study. Setting: Operating theatres of a tertiary training hospital.
Subjects: Ventilated patients who required intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring.
Outcome measures: PPV during different levels of PEEP.
Method: Patients were anaesthetised by means of a standard technique and ventilated with a tidal volume of 9 ml/kg ideal body mass. The PPV was calculated at PEEP levels of 2, 5, 8 and 10 cmH2O. PPV was compared at the various PEEP levels.
Results: PPV at a PEEP of 8 cmH2O and 10 cmH2O was significantly larger than that at 2 cmH2O (p-value < 0.001). PPV at a PEEP of 10 cmH2O was significantly larger than that at 8 cmH2O (p-value < 0.001). PPV at a PEEP of 8 cmH2O was larger than that at 5 cmH2O (p-value = 0.002). PPV at a PEEP of 2 and 5 cmH2O did not differ significantly (p-value = 0.194).
Conclusion: We have demonstrated that, in patients with normal lungs, PEEP has a significant influence on PPV. PPV may be overestimated if PEEP ≥ 8 cmH2O is applied in patients who are ventilated with a tidal volume of 9 ml/kg. It is recommended that in patients with healthy lungs PPV should be measured at a standardised PEEP of ≤ 5 cmH2O.
Keywords: blood volume, monitoring, pulse pressure, blood pressure determination, positive-pressure respiration, positive end-expiratory pressure
South Afr J Anaesth Analg 2012;18(6):333-338
Design: An observational study. Setting: Operating theatres of a tertiary training hospital.
Subjects: Ventilated patients who required intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring.
Outcome measures: PPV during different levels of PEEP.
Method: Patients were anaesthetised by means of a standard technique and ventilated with a tidal volume of 9 ml/kg ideal body mass. The PPV was calculated at PEEP levels of 2, 5, 8 and 10 cmH2O. PPV was compared at the various PEEP levels.
Results: PPV at a PEEP of 8 cmH2O and 10 cmH2O was significantly larger than that at 2 cmH2O (p-value < 0.001). PPV at a PEEP of 10 cmH2O was significantly larger than that at 8 cmH2O (p-value < 0.001). PPV at a PEEP of 8 cmH2O was larger than that at 5 cmH2O (p-value = 0.002). PPV at a PEEP of 2 and 5 cmH2O did not differ significantly (p-value = 0.194).
Conclusion: We have demonstrated that, in patients with normal lungs, PEEP has a significant influence on PPV. PPV may be overestimated if PEEP ≥ 8 cmH2O is applied in patients who are ventilated with a tidal volume of 9 ml/kg. It is recommended that in patients with healthy lungs PPV should be measured at a standardised PEEP of ≤ 5 cmH2O.
Keywords: blood volume, monitoring, pulse pressure, blood pressure determination, positive-pressure respiration, positive end-expiratory pressure
South Afr J Anaesth Analg 2012;18(6):333-338
