Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation

can it be done?

Alan B. Marr, Frederick A. Moore, R. Matthew Sailors, Alicia Valdivia, John H. Selby, Rosemary A. Kozar, Christine S Cocanour, Bruce A. McKinley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Preload-directed resuscitation is the standard of care in U.S. trauma centers. As part of our standardized protocol for traumatic shock resuscitation, patients who do not respond to initial interventions of hemoglobin replacement and fluid volume loading have optimal preload determined using a standardized algorithm to generate a "Starling curve." We retrospectively analyzed data from 147 consecutive resuscitation protocol patients during the 24 months ending August 2002. Fifty (34%) of these patients required preload optimization, of which the optimization algorithm was completed in 36 (72%). The average age of those who required preload optimization was 44 +/- 3 years vs. 34 +/- 1 years for patients who did not. Execution of the algorithm caused PCWP to increase from 18 +/- 1 mmHg to a maximum of 25 +/- 2 mmHg and CI to increase from 3.2 +/- 0.1 L/min m(-2) to 4.5 +/- 0.4 L/min m(-2). Algorithm logic determined PCWP = 24 +/- 2 to be optimal preload at the maximum CI = 4.8 +/- 0.4, and as the volume loading threshold for the remaining time of the resuscitation process. Starling curve preload optimization was begun 6.5 +/- 0.8 h after start of the resuscitation protocol and required 36 +/- 5 min and 4 +/- 0.4 fluid boluses (1.6 +/- 0.2 L). Comparison of early response of those patients who required preload optimization and those who did not indicated hemodynamic compromise apparent in the 1st 4 h of standardized resuscitation. We conclude that preload optimization using sequential fluid bolus and PCWP-CI measurement to generate a Starling curve is feasible during ICU shock resuscitation, but that there is the disadvantage that increasing and maintaining high PCWP may contribute to problematic tissue edema.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)300-305
Number of pages6
JournalShock (Augusta, Ga.)
Volume21
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Starlings
Resuscitation
Shock
Traumatic Shock
Trauma Centers
Standard of Care
Edema
Hemoglobins
Hemodynamics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Physiology

Cite this

Marr, A. B., Moore, F. A., Sailors, R. M., Valdivia, A., Selby, J. H., Kozar, R. A., ... McKinley, B. A. (2004). Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation: can it be done? Shock (Augusta, Ga.), 21(4), 300-305.

Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation : can it be done? / Marr, Alan B.; Moore, Frederick A.; Sailors, R. Matthew; Valdivia, Alicia; Selby, John H.; Kozar, Rosemary A.; Cocanour, Christine S; McKinley, Bruce A.

In: Shock (Augusta, Ga.), Vol. 21, No. 4, 04.2004, p. 300-305.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Marr, AB, Moore, FA, Sailors, RM, Valdivia, A, Selby, JH, Kozar, RA, Cocanour, CS & McKinley, BA 2004, 'Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation: can it be done?', Shock (Augusta, Ga.), vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 300-305.
Marr AB, Moore FA, Sailors RM, Valdivia A, Selby JH, Kozar RA et al. Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation: can it be done? Shock (Augusta, Ga.). 2004 Apr;21(4):300-305.
Marr, Alan B. ; Moore, Frederick A. ; Sailors, R. Matthew ; Valdivia, Alicia ; Selby, John H. ; Kozar, Rosemary A. ; Cocanour, Christine S ; McKinley, Bruce A. / Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation : can it be done?. In: Shock (Augusta, Ga.). 2004 ; Vol. 21, No. 4. pp. 300-305.
@article{10cda952f2bf46399743b613e317cb5d,
title = "Preload optimization using {"}starling curve{"} generation during shock resuscitation: can it be done?",
abstract = "Preload-directed resuscitation is the standard of care in U.S. trauma centers. As part of our standardized protocol for traumatic shock resuscitation, patients who do not respond to initial interventions of hemoglobin replacement and fluid volume loading have optimal preload determined using a standardized algorithm to generate a {"}Starling curve.{"} We retrospectively analyzed data from 147 consecutive resuscitation protocol patients during the 24 months ending August 2002. Fifty (34{\%}) of these patients required preload optimization, of which the optimization algorithm was completed in 36 (72{\%}). The average age of those who required preload optimization was 44 +/- 3 years vs. 34 +/- 1 years for patients who did not. Execution of the algorithm caused PCWP to increase from 18 +/- 1 mmHg to a maximum of 25 +/- 2 mmHg and CI to increase from 3.2 +/- 0.1 L/min m(-2) to 4.5 +/- 0.4 L/min m(-2). Algorithm logic determined PCWP = 24 +/- 2 to be optimal preload at the maximum CI = 4.8 +/- 0.4, and as the volume loading threshold for the remaining time of the resuscitation process. Starling curve preload optimization was begun 6.5 +/- 0.8 h after start of the resuscitation protocol and required 36 +/- 5 min and 4 +/- 0.4 fluid boluses (1.6 +/- 0.2 L). Comparison of early response of those patients who required preload optimization and those who did not indicated hemodynamic compromise apparent in the 1st 4 h of standardized resuscitation. We conclude that preload optimization using sequential fluid bolus and PCWP-CI measurement to generate a Starling curve is feasible during ICU shock resuscitation, but that there is the disadvantage that increasing and maintaining high PCWP may contribute to problematic tissue edema.",
author = "Marr, {Alan B.} and Moore, {Frederick A.} and Sailors, {R. Matthew} and Alicia Valdivia and Selby, {John H.} and Kozar, {Rosemary A.} and Cocanour, {Christine S} and McKinley, {Bruce A.}",
year = "2004",
month = "4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "300--305",
journal = "Shock",
issn = "1073-2322",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Preload optimization using "starling curve" generation during shock resuscitation

T2 - can it be done?

AU - Marr, Alan B.

AU - Moore, Frederick A.

AU - Sailors, R. Matthew

AU - Valdivia, Alicia

AU - Selby, John H.

AU - Kozar, Rosemary A.

AU - Cocanour, Christine S

AU - McKinley, Bruce A.

PY - 2004/4

Y1 - 2004/4

N2 - Preload-directed resuscitation is the standard of care in U.S. trauma centers. As part of our standardized protocol for traumatic shock resuscitation, patients who do not respond to initial interventions of hemoglobin replacement and fluid volume loading have optimal preload determined using a standardized algorithm to generate a "Starling curve." We retrospectively analyzed data from 147 consecutive resuscitation protocol patients during the 24 months ending August 2002. Fifty (34%) of these patients required preload optimization, of which the optimization algorithm was completed in 36 (72%). The average age of those who required preload optimization was 44 +/- 3 years vs. 34 +/- 1 years for patients who did not. Execution of the algorithm caused PCWP to increase from 18 +/- 1 mmHg to a maximum of 25 +/- 2 mmHg and CI to increase from 3.2 +/- 0.1 L/min m(-2) to 4.5 +/- 0.4 L/min m(-2). Algorithm logic determined PCWP = 24 +/- 2 to be optimal preload at the maximum CI = 4.8 +/- 0.4, and as the volume loading threshold for the remaining time of the resuscitation process. Starling curve preload optimization was begun 6.5 +/- 0.8 h after start of the resuscitation protocol and required 36 +/- 5 min and 4 +/- 0.4 fluid boluses (1.6 +/- 0.2 L). Comparison of early response of those patients who required preload optimization and those who did not indicated hemodynamic compromise apparent in the 1st 4 h of standardized resuscitation. We conclude that preload optimization using sequential fluid bolus and PCWP-CI measurement to generate a Starling curve is feasible during ICU shock resuscitation, but that there is the disadvantage that increasing and maintaining high PCWP may contribute to problematic tissue edema.

AB - Preload-directed resuscitation is the standard of care in U.S. trauma centers. As part of our standardized protocol for traumatic shock resuscitation, patients who do not respond to initial interventions of hemoglobin replacement and fluid volume loading have optimal preload determined using a standardized algorithm to generate a "Starling curve." We retrospectively analyzed data from 147 consecutive resuscitation protocol patients during the 24 months ending August 2002. Fifty (34%) of these patients required preload optimization, of which the optimization algorithm was completed in 36 (72%). The average age of those who required preload optimization was 44 +/- 3 years vs. 34 +/- 1 years for patients who did not. Execution of the algorithm caused PCWP to increase from 18 +/- 1 mmHg to a maximum of 25 +/- 2 mmHg and CI to increase from 3.2 +/- 0.1 L/min m(-2) to 4.5 +/- 0.4 L/min m(-2). Algorithm logic determined PCWP = 24 +/- 2 to be optimal preload at the maximum CI = 4.8 +/- 0.4, and as the volume loading threshold for the remaining time of the resuscitation process. Starling curve preload optimization was begun 6.5 +/- 0.8 h after start of the resuscitation protocol and required 36 +/- 5 min and 4 +/- 0.4 fluid boluses (1.6 +/- 0.2 L). Comparison of early response of those patients who required preload optimization and those who did not indicated hemodynamic compromise apparent in the 1st 4 h of standardized resuscitation. We conclude that preload optimization using sequential fluid bolus and PCWP-CI measurement to generate a Starling curve is feasible during ICU shock resuscitation, but that there is the disadvantage that increasing and maintaining high PCWP may contribute to problematic tissue edema.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=18744406807&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=18744406807&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 300

EP - 305

JO - Shock

JF - Shock

SN - 1073-2322

IS - 4

ER -