• Roger C, Zieleskiewicz L, Demattei C, Lakhal K, Piton G, Louart B, Constantin JM, Chabanne R, Faure JS, Mahjoub Y, et al. Time course of fluid responsiveness in sepsis: the fluid challenge revisiting (FCREV) study. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):179.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Levy MM, Evans LE, Rhodes A. The surviving sepsis campaign bundle: 2018 update. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(6):925–8.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Michard F, Teboul JL. Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients: a critical analysis of the evidence. Chest. 2002;121(6):2000–8.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Monnet X, Pinsky MR. Predicting the determinants of volume responsiveness. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41(2):354–6.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bendjelid K, Romand JA. Fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a review of indices used in intensive care. Intensive Care Med. 2003;29(3):352–60.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Teboul JL, Monnet X. Pulse pressure variation and ARDS. Minerva Anestesiol. 2013;79(4):398–407.

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bentzer P, Griesdale DE, Boyd J, MacLean K, Sirounis D, Ayas NT. Will this hemodynamically unstable patient respond to a bolus of intravenous fluids? JAMA. 2016;316(12):1298–309.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • De Backer D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, Koch M, Vincent JL. Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(4):517–23.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, Kumar A, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Nunnally ME, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43(3):304–77.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Myatra SN, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Use of “tidal volume challenge” to improve the reliability of pulse pressure variation. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):60.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liu Y, Wei LQ, Li GQ, Yu X, Li GF, Li YM. Pulse pressure variation adjusted by respiratory changes in pleural pressure, rather than by tidal volume, reliably predicts fluid responsiveness in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(2):342–51.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yonis H, Bitker L, Aublanc M, Perinel Ragey S, Riad Z, Lissonde F, Louf-Durier A, Debord S, Gobert F, Tapponnier R, et al. Change in cardiac output during Trendelenburg maneuver is a reliable predictor of fluid responsiveness in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in the prone position under protective ventilation. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):295.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Min JJ, Gil NS, Lee JH, Ryu DK, Kim CS, Lee SM. Predictor of fluid responsiveness in the “grey zone”: augmented pulse pressure variation through a temporary increase in tidal volume. Br J Anaesth. 2017;119(1):50–6.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, Bellomo R, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith CM, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–10.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Force ADT, Ranieri VM, Rubenfeld GD, Thompson BT, Ferguson ND, Caldwell E, Fan E, Camporota L, Slutsky AS. Acute respiratory distress syndrome: the Berlin definition. JAMA. 2012;307(23):2526–33.


    Google Scholar
     

  • Teboul JL, Monnet X, Chemla D, Michard F. Arterial pulse pressure variation with mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199(1):22–31.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gelinas C, Fillion L, Puntillo KA, Viens C, Fortier M. Validation of the critical-care pain observation tool in adult patients. Am J Crit Care. 2006;15(4):420–7.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ely EW, Truman B, Shintani A, Thomason JW, Wheeler AP, Gordon S, Francis J, Speroff T, Gautam S, Margolin R, et al. Monitoring sedation status over time in ICU patients: reliability and validity of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS). JAMA. 2003;289(22):2983–91.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fluss R, Faraggi D, Reiser B. Estimation of the Youden Index and its associated cutoff point. Biom J. 2005;47(4):458–72.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837–45.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143(1):29–36.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yang X, Du B. Does pulse pressure variation predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2014;18(6):650.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Teboul JL, Pinsky MR, Mercat A, Anguel N, Bernardin G, Achard JM, Boulain T, Richard C. Estimating cardiac filling pressure in mechanically ventilated patients with hyperinflation. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(11):3631–6.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ferguson ND. Low tidal volumes for all? JAMA. 2012;308(16):1689–90.

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rackley CR, MacIntyre NR. Low tidal volumes for everyone? Chest. 2019;156(4):783–91.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Pinsky MR. Using ventilation-induced aortic pressure and flow variation to diagnose preload responsiveness. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30(6):1008–10.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Myatra SN, Prabu NR, Divatia JV, Monnet X, Kulkarni AP, Teboul JL. The changes in pulse pressure variation or stroke volume variation after a “Tidal Volume Challenge” reliably predict fluid responsiveness during low tidal volume ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(3):415–21.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Monnet X, Bleibtreu A, Ferre A, Dres M, Gharbi R, Richard C, Teboul JL. Passive leg-raising and end-expiratory occlusion tests perform better than pulse pressure variation in patients with low respiratory system compliance. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(1):152–7.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Marik PE, Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? an updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(7):1774–81.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cecconi M, Hofer C, Teboul JL, Pettila V, Wilkman E, Molnar Z, Della Rocca G, Aldecoa C, Artigas A, Jog S, et al. Fluid challenges in intensive care: the FENICE study: a global inception cohort study. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41(9):1529–37.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cannesson M, Pestel G, Ricks C, Hoeft A, Perel A. Hemodynamic monitoring and management in patients undergoing high risk surgery: a survey among North American and European anesthesiologists. Crit Care. 2011;15(4):R197.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Monnet X, Marik PE, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update. Ann Intensive Care. 2016;6(1):111.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hasanin A. Fluid responsiveness in acute circulatory failure. J Intensive Care. 2015;3:50.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rights and permissions

    Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

    Disclaimer:

    This article is autogenerated using RSS feeds and has not been created or edited by OA JF.

    Click here for Source link (https://www.biomedcentral.com/)