Premium
Existing fluid responsiveness studies using the mini‐fluid challenge may be misleading: Methodological considerations and simulations
Author(s) -
Enevoldsen Johannes,
Scheeren Thomas W. L.,
Berg Jonas M.,
Vistisen Simon T.
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
acta anaesthesiologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.738
H-Index - 107
eISSN - 1399-6576
pISSN - 0001-5172
DOI - 10.1111/aas.13965
Subject(s) - medicine , receiver operating characteristic , stroke (engine) , stroke volume , cardiology , mechanical engineering , heart failure , ejection fraction , engineering
Background The mini‐fluid challenge (MFC) is a clinical concept of predicting fluid responsiveness by rapidly infusing a small amount of intravenous fluids, typically 100 ml, and systematically assessing its haemodynamic effect. The MFC method is meant to predict if a patient will respond to a subsequent, larger fluid challenge, typically another 400 ml, with a significant increase in stroke volume. Methods We critically evaluated the general methodology of MFC studies, with statistical considerations, secondary analysis of an existing study and simulations. Results Secondary analysis of an existing study showed that the MFC could predict the total fluid response (MFC + 400 ml) with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.92, but that the prediction was worse than random for the response to the remaining 400 ml (AUROC = 0.33). In a null simulation with no response to both the MFC and the subsequent fluid challenge, the commonly used analysis could predict fluid responsiveness with an AUROC of 0.73. Conclusion Many existing MFC studies are likely overestimating the classification accuracy of the MFC. This should be considered before adopting the MFC into clinical practice. A better study design includes a second, independent measurement of stroke volume after the MFC. This measurement serves as reference for the response to the subsequent fluid challenge.