Brachial artery peak velocity variation to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients

INTRODUCTION Although several parameters have been proposed to predict the hemodynamic response to fluid expansion in critically ill patients, most of them are invasive or require the use of special monitoring devices. The aim of this study is to determine whether noninvasive evaluation of respiratory variation of brachial artery peak velocity flow measured using Doppler ultrasound could predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS We conducted a prospective clinical research in a 17-bed multidisciplinary ICU and included 38 mechanically ventilated patients for whom fluid administration was planned due to the presence of acute circulatory failure. Volume expansion (VE) was performed with 500 mL of a synthetic colloid. Patients were classified as responders if stroke volume index (SVi) increased >or= 15% after VE. The respiratory variation in Vpeakbrach (DeltaVpeakbrach) was calculated as the difference between maximum and minimum values of Vpeakbrach over a single respiratory cycle, divided by the mean of the two values and expressed as a percentage. Radial arterial pressure variation (DeltaPPrad) and stroke volume variation measured using the FloTrac/Vigileo system (DeltaSVVigileo), were also calculated. RESULTS VE increased SVi by >or= 15% in 19 patients (responders). At baseline, DeltaVpeakbrach, DeltaPPrad and DeltaSVVigileo were significantly higher in responder than nonresponder patients [14 vs 8%; 18 vs. 5%; 13 vs 8%; P < 0.0001, respectively). A DeltaVpeakbrach value >10% predicted fluid responsiveness with a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 95%. A DeltaPPrad value >10% and a DeltaSVVigileo >11% predicted volume responsiveness with a sensitivity of 95% and 79%, and a specificity of 95% and 89%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Respiratory variations in brachial artery peak velocity could be a feasible tool for the noninvasive assessment of fluid responsiveness in patients with mechanical ventilatory support and acute circulatory failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00890071.

How Can Nanotechnology Help to Repair the Body? Advances in Cardiac, Skin, Bone, Cartilage and Nerve Tissue Regeneration

Nanotechnologists have become involved in regenerative medicine via creation of biomaterials and nanostructures with potential clinical implications. Their aim is to develop systems that can mimic, reinforce or even create in vivo tissue repair strategies. In fact, in the last decade, important advances in the field of tissue engineering, cell therapy and cell delivery have already been achieved. In this review, we will delve into the latest research advances and discuss whether cell and/or tissue repair devices are a possibility. Focusing on the application of nanotechnology in tissue engineering research, this review highlights recent advances in the application of nano-engineered scaffolds designed to replace or restore the followed tissues: (i) skin; (ii) cartilage; (iii) bone; (iv) nerve; and (v) cardiac.

Monitoring of sedation during neuroaxial blockade.

Abstract Study objective: The arousal state changes during spinal anesthesia. It is not clear if BIS and others devices could monitor the induced neuroaxial blockade sedation. Our objective was evaluate BIS and entropy values when spinal anesthesia is done. Design: We developed a prospective study. Patients: 40 patients were included in this study, ASA I-III, over 60 years old, undergoing spinal anesthesia, without premedication scheduled for orthopedics procedures. Intervention: Spinal anesthesia was performed with the unseated volunteer in the lateral decubitus position with a 25-gauge Whitacre needle at L2-L3 space, andanesthesia was done with 12 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Patients were positioned supine for 5 min after spinal anesthesia. Measurements: Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation OAA/S, response (RE) and state entropy (SE) and BIS, and standard hemodynamic measures. Main results: Statistical analysis were performed by Wilcoxon test or ANOVA, p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.RE and BIS showed a better correlation with the OAA/S scale values (Pk 0.81 and 0.82) than SE (Pk 0.69). The OAA/S, RE and SE showed significative differences from basal values after 30 min of neuroaxial anesthesia (ANOVA p<0.05). BIS showed differences after 40 min (ANOVA p<0.05). There were no differences between BIS and RE values along the study (ANOVA p>0.05). Conclusions: The spinal anesthesia decreased the cortical activity and these were founded by OAA/S scale and depth anesthetics monitors. OAA/S was a more sensitive value of this induced sedation. BIS and RE showed a better correlation with OAA/S scale than SE.