Evaluation of pulse pressure variation and pleth variability index to predict fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated isoflurane‐anesthetized dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether pulse pressure variation (PPV) and pleth variability index (PVI) are more accurate than central venous pressure (CVP) for predicting fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated isoflurane-anesthetized dogs after premedication with acepromazine. DESIGN: Prospective experimental trial. SETTING: University teaching hospital. ANIMALS: Twelve Harrier hound dogs. INTERVENTIONS: Each dog was anesthetized and had a fluid challenge performed. This was repeated 4 weeks later for a total of 24 fluid challenges. After premedication with intramuscular acepromazine, anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with isoflurane. The dogs were mechanically ventilated with constant settings. The fluid challenge consisted of 10 mL/kg of 6% hydroxyethyl starch intravenously over 13 minutes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Before and after the fluid challenge, PPV, PVI, CVP, and other hemodynamics were recorded. Change in velocity time integral of pulmonary arterial blood flow by echocardiography was calculated as an indication of change in stroke volume. A fluid responder was defined as an increase in velocity time integral ≥ 15%. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine cutoff values. Areas under ROC curve were calculated and compared. Dogs responded on 14 fluid challenges and did not on 10. Cutoff values for PPV and PVI were 11% (sensitivity 79%; specificity 80%) and 9.3% (sensitivity 86%; specificity 70%), respectively. The areas under the ROC curve of PPV [0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-1.00, P = 0.038] and PVI (0.84, 95% CI: 0.68-1.00, P = 0.043) were significantly higher than CVP (0.56, 95% CI: 0.32-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: PPV and PVI predicted fluid responsiveness more accurately than CVP and may be useful to guide fluid administration in mechanically ventilated isoflurane-anesthetized dogs after premedication with acepromazine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".