Comparative Study between Femoral Arterial Doppler and Echocardiography in fluid responsiveness assessment in Septic Shock Patients

Journal Title: The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine - Year 2018, Vol 72, Issue 9

Abstract

<strong>Background: </strong>Fluid replacement is considered the cornerstone of resuscitation in critically ill patients especially in patients with septic shock. However, only about 50% of critically ill hemodynamically unstable patients are responsive to fluids. Furthermore, both under resuscitation and overzealous fluid administration adversely affect the outcome. Consequently, the resuscitation of critically ill patients requires an accurate assessment of the patients’ intravascular volume status and their volume responsiveness. <strong>Aim of the Study: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare between the femoral arterial doppler and Echocardiography in fluid responsiveness assessment in septic shock patients. <strong>Methodology: </strong>The study was conducted on 30 adult male and female patients admitted to Critical Care Department in Ain shams University Hospitals with the diagnosis septic shock. All patients in this study have the Criteria of Septic shock. Echocardiographic examination and femoral Doppler were done for all included patients. Velocity time integral on left ventricle outflow tract and Velocity time integral on femoral artery were measured before and after fluid resuscitation, after infusion of 30 ml/kg over 3 hours, <strong>Results:  </strong>These results show that there were 23 patients were responded clinically to fluid resuscitation from all total number of 30 patients. From all total number of patients whom clinically responded, 22 patients responded to fluid resuscitation by transthoracic echocardiography and 23 patients responded by femoral Doppler.  <strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results showed that femoral Doppler parameters were a reliable predictor to fluid responsiveness in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock as well as transthoracic echocardiography in dynamic monitoring of the change in stroke volume after a maneuver that increases or decreases venous return (preload). However femoral Doppler seems to be easier and rapid tools to be used by junior staff.

Authors and Affiliations

Eman Helal

Keywords

Related Articles

Role of Radiofrequency in the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain

<strong>Background: </strong>low back pain (LBP) is related to disability and work absence and accounts for high economical costs. The management of LBP comprises a range of different intervention strategies including su...

Sildenafil Citrate and Uteroplacental Perfusion in Fetal Growth Restriction

<span>Background: </span><span>Severe early-onset fetal growth restriction can lead to a range of adverse outcomes including fetal or neonatal death, neurodisability, and lifelong risks to the health of the affected chil...

Maximizing Resection of Diffused Low-Grade Glioma Functional Outcome

<span>Background: </span><span>most of adults with Diffuse Low Grade Gliomas (DLGGs) are diagnosed with an average age of 39 years and the diagnosis is often made around fully functioning individuals. Currently extent of...

Emergency Airway Management in Neck Trauma

Airway management in patients who have sustained direct trauma to the airway is among the most challenging problems for emergency clinicians. Blunt or penetrating injuries to the head, oropharynx, neck, or upper chest ca...

Osteoporosis: a Common Health Problem in Senior Adult Population of Arar City, Saudi Arabia

<strong>Background: </strong>Osteoporosis is characterized by compromised bone strength predisposing to an increased risk of fracture, which has significant effects on human health, quality of life. <strong>Objective:</s...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP584316
  • DOI 10.12816/ejhm.2018.10746
  • Views 89
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Eman Helal (2018). Comparative Study between Femoral Arterial Doppler and Echocardiography in fluid responsiveness assessment in Septic Shock Patients. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine, 72(9), 5227-5232. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-584316