Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Central venous pressure versus pulmonary artery catheter-directed shock resuscitation.

Shock 2009 November
Previously, we developed a protocol for shock resuscitation of severe trauma patients to reverse shock and regain hemodynamic stability during the first 24 intensive care unit (ICU) hours. Key hemodynamic measurements of cardiac output and preload were obtained using a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC). As an alternative, we developed a protocol that used central venous pressure (CVP) to guide decision making for interventions to regain hemodynamic stability [mean arterial pressure (MAP) >or= 65 mmHg and heart rate (HR) <or= 130 bpm]. Either protocol was available and required for traumatic shock resuscitation using bedside computerized clinical decision support to standardize decision making, and PAC was available if CVP-directed resuscitation was inadequate. We hypothesized that patients would be appropriately assigned to either protocol by trauma surgeon assessment of hemodynamic stability upon ICU admission. High-risk patients admitted to a level-1 trauma center ICU underwent resuscitation. Criteria were 1) major torso trauma, 2) base deficit (BD) >or= 6 mEq/L or systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg, 3) transfusion of >or= 1 unit packed red blood cells (PRBC), or >or= age 65 years with two of three criteria. Patients with brain injury were excluded. Data were recorded prospectively. In 24 months ending July 31, 2006, of 193 patients, 114 (59%) were assigned CVP- directed resuscitation, and 79 (41%) were assigned PAC-directed resuscitation. A subgroup of 11 (10%) initially assigned CVP was reassigned PAC-directed resuscitation (7 +/- 2 h after start) due to hemodynamic instability. Crystalloid fluid and PRBC resuscitation volumes for PAC (8 +/- 1 L lactated Ringer's [LR], 5 +/- 0.4 units PRBC) were > CVP (5 +/- 0.4 L LR, 3 +/- 0.3 units PRBC) and similar to CVP - PAC protocol subgroup patients (9 +/- 2 L LR, 5 +/- 1 units PRBC). Intensive care unit (ICU) stay and survival rate for PAC (18 +/- 2 days, 75%) were similar to CVP - PAC (17 +/- 4 days, 73%) and worse than CVP protocol subgroup patients (9 +/- 1 days, 98%). Traumatic shock resuscitation is feasible using CVP as a primary hemodynamic monitor as part of a protocol that includes explicit definition of hemodynamic instability and where PAC monitoring is readily available. Computerized decision support provides a technique to implement complex protocol care processes and analyze patient response.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app