Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026
The effect of preload on Doppler systolic time in a large emergency department cohort with suspected sepsis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Atwi Sarah, Nunnally Jared, Ugale Kristen, Ko So Mi, Bond Jaclyn, Boozer Kimberly, Bautista Raymond J, Torres Catalina, Sedillo Matthew, Lachner-Piza Daniel, Savery Tracy, Hebscher Melissa, Eibl Joseph K, Kenny Jon-Emile S, Haycock Korbin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Change in the corrected flow time of the common carotid artery (ccFTΔ) during a preload challenge (PC) is a surrogate for stroke volume change (SVΔ) to infer preload responsiveness (PR).
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study comprising patients with suspected sepsis in a large, publicly funded, academic emergency department; no patient health information is linked to the Doppler assessments. Carotid Doppler spectrograms from a wireless, wearable critical care Doppler ultrasound system are analyzed for ccFTΔ during a PC (either infusion of 300 mL of crystalloid over 3 min or a Trendelenburg maneuver). The primary objectives of this study are to describe the proportion of PR patients by previously described ccFTΔ thresholds (i.e., both 4 and 7 ms ccFTΔ ), describe time-to-peak (TTP) ccFTΔ, and evaluate the ability of baseline ccFT to detect ccFTΔ during PC, using both the equations of Wodey and Bazett. Comparisons of related outcomes were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Holm procedure, baseline ccFT discrimination was quantified using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and TTP was estimated using patient-level bootstrap resampling. Threshold-agnostic ccFTΔ trajectories were additionally explored using unsupervised k-means clustering of patient-level temporal responses for both correction equations.
RESULTS: A PC was attempted in 4367 patients and an adequate ccFTΔ was collected from 4,128 patients (95%). In total, 982,937 Doppler cardiac cycles are included. The median ccFTΔ was 7.3 milliseconds (ms). 51.9% of patients had a ccFTΔ ≥ 7 ms, while 68.6% had a ccFTΔ ≥ 4 ms by the equation of Wodey. For Bazett, these fractions were 61.2% and 73.5%, respectively. For patients identified as PR based upon either a 4 ms or 7 ms ccFTΔ threshold, the time-to-peak ccFTΔ was 27.5 s for both equations. Baseline absolute ccFT did not discriminate PR from PUR patients under both correction formulae (AUROC 0.56-0.57).
CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the largest reported dataset of ED patients with suspected sepsis receiving PR assessments by Doppler ultrasound, comprising nearly 1 million Doppler cardiac cycles obtained from over 4100 ED patients. Both 7 ms and 4 ms ccFTΔ thresholds described clinically-accepted rates of PR. The TTP was roughly 30 s into PC and baseline ccFT did not accurately detect ccFTΔ during PC. Finally, a hypothesis-generating analysis identified four distinct ccFTΔ trajectories during PC which may represent unique preload response patterns during PR testing.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study comprising patients with suspected sepsis in a large, publicly funded, academic emergency department; no patient health information is linked to the Doppler assessments. Carotid Doppler spectrograms from a wireless, wearable critical care Doppler ultrasound system are analyzed for ccFTΔ during a PC (either infusion of 300 mL of crystalloid over 3 min or a Trendelenburg maneuver). The primary objectives of this study are to describe the proportion of PR patients by previously described ccFTΔ thresholds (i.e., both 4 and 7 ms ccFTΔ ), describe time-to-peak (TTP) ccFTΔ, and evaluate the ability of baseline ccFT to detect ccFTΔ during PC, using both the equations of Wodey and Bazett. Comparisons of related outcomes were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Holm procedure, baseline ccFT discrimination was quantified using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and TTP was estimated using patient-level bootstrap resampling. Threshold-agnostic ccFTΔ trajectories were additionally explored using unsupervised k-means clustering of patient-level temporal responses for both correction equations.
RESULTS: A PC was attempted in 4367 patients and an adequate ccFTΔ was collected from 4,128 patients (95%). In total, 982,937 Doppler cardiac cycles are included. The median ccFTΔ was 7.3 milliseconds (ms). 51.9% of patients had a ccFTΔ ≥ 7 ms, while 68.6% had a ccFTΔ ≥ 4 ms by the equation of Wodey. For Bazett, these fractions were 61.2% and 73.5%, respectively. For patients identified as PR based upon either a 4 ms or 7 ms ccFTΔ threshold, the time-to-peak ccFTΔ was 27.5 s for both equations. Baseline absolute ccFT did not discriminate PR from PUR patients under both correction formulae (AUROC 0.56-0.57).
CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the largest reported dataset of ED patients with suspected sepsis receiving PR assessments by Doppler ultrasound, comprising nearly 1 million Doppler cardiac cycles obtained from over 4100 ED patients. Both 7 ms and 4 ms ccFTΔ thresholds described clinically-accepted rates of PR. The TTP was roughly 30 s into PC and baseline ccFT did not accurately detect ccFTΔ during PC. Finally, a hypothesis-generating analysis identified four distinct ccFTΔ trajectories during PC which may represent unique preload response patterns during PR testing.