Comparing Fluid Management Techniques in Pigs
Author Information
Author(s): Noel-Morgan J, Fantoni DT, Otsuki DA, Auler JO Jr
Primary Institution: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil
Hypothesis
The study aims to compare pulse pressure variation (PPV) with conventional parameters for guiding resuscitation in a pig model of acute hemorrhagic shock with endotoxemia.
Conclusion
Both PPV-guided and conventional fluid management resulted in similar hemodynamic outcomes, but CVP was higher in the conventional group.
Supporting Evidence
- All groups showed significant decreases in cardiac index, MAP, CVP, SvO2, and oxygen delivery index at the first time point.
- Both treated groups showed hemodynamic recovery with no statistical difference from baseline or each other.
- The only statistical difference between treatment groups was in CVP, which was higher in the conventional group.
Takeaway
The study looked at how two different ways of giving fluids to pigs in shock worked, and found they worked about the same, but one way kept a certain measurement higher.
Methodology
Twenty-seven anesthetized pigs were divided into three groups and subjected to acute hemorrhagic shock with endotoxin infusion, with hemodynamic parameters measured at various times.
Limitations
The clinical impacts of the findings remain to be determined.
Participant Demographics
Anesthetized, mechanically ventilated pigs.
Statistical Information
P-Value
P = 0.009; P < 0.001; P = 0.006
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website