Respiratory variation in the internal jugular vein does not predict fluid responsiveness in the prone position during adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a prospective cohort study

Abstract

Abstract Background Respiratory variation in the internal jugular vein (IJVV) has not shown promising results in predicting volume responsiveness in ventilated patients with low tidal volume (Vt) in prone position. We aimed to determine whether the baseline respiratory variation in the IJVV value measured by ultrasound might predict fluid responsiveness in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with low Vt. Methods According to the fluid responsiveness results, the included patients were divided into two groups: those who responded to volume expansion, denoted the responder group, and those who did not respond, denoted the non-responder group. The primary outcome was determination of the value of baseline IJVV in predicting fluid responsiveness (≥15% increases in stroke volume index (SVI) after 7 ml·kg-1 colloid administration) in patients with AIS undergoing PSF during low Vt ventilation. Secondary outcomes were estimation of the diagnostic performance of pulse pressure variation (PPV), stroke volume variation (SVV), and the combination of IJVV and PPV in predicting fluid responsiveness in this surgical setting. The ability of each parameter to predict fluid responsiveness was assessed using a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results Fifty-six patients were included, 36 (64.29%) of whom were deemed fluid responsive. No significant difference in baseline IJVV was found between responders and non-responders (25.89% vs. 23.66%, p = 0.73), and no correlation was detected between baseline IJVV and the increase in SVI after volume expansion (r = 0.14, p = 0.40). A baseline IJVV greater than 32.00%, SVV greater than 14.30%, PPV greater than 11.00%, and a combination of IJVV and PPV greater than 64.00% had utility in identifying fluid responsiveness, with a sensitivity of 33.33%, 77.78%, 55.56%, and 55.56%, respectively, and a specificity of 80.00%, 50.00%, 65.00%, and 65.00%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the baseline values of IJVV, SVV, PPV, and the combination of IJVV and PPV was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.38–0.65, p=0.83), 0.54 (95% CI, 0.40–0.67, p=0.67), 0.58 (95% CI, 0.45–0.71, p=0.31), and 0.57 (95% CI, 0.43–0.71, p=0.37), respectively. Conclusions Ultrasonic-derived IJVV lacked accuracy in predicting fluid responsiveness in patients with AIS undergoing PSF during low Vt ventilation. In addition, the baseline values of PPV, SVV, and the combination of IJVV and PPV did not predict fluid responsiveness in this surgical setting. Trail registration This trial was registered at www.chictr.org (ChiCTR2200064947) on 24/10/2022. All data were collected through chart review.