Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 17, 2025
Standardized Model of Ventricular Fibrillation and Advanced Cardiac Life Support in Swine
Published on: January 30, 2020
Venous return physiology applied to post-cardiac arrest haemodynamic management: a post hoc analysis of the
Anders Aneman1,2,3, Markus Benedikt Skrifvars4, Koen Ameloot5,6,7,8
1Intensive Care Unit, Liverpool Hospital, South Western Sydney Local Health District and South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. anders.aneman@health.nsw.gov.au.
Background:
The European Resuscitation Council 2021 guidelines for haemodynamic monitoring and management during post-resuscitation care from cardiac arrest call for an individualised approach to therapeutic interventions. Combining the cardiac function and venous return curves with the inclusion of the mean systemic filling pressure enables a physiological illustration of intravascular volume, vasoconstriction and inotropy. An analogue mean systemic filling pressure (Pmsa) may be calculated once cardiac output, mean arterial and central venous pressure are known. The NEUROPROTECT trial compared targeting a mean arterial pressure of 65 mmHg (standard) versus an early goal directed haemodynamic optimisation targeting 85 mmHg (high) in ICU for 36 h after cardiac arrest. The trial data were used in this study to calculate post hoc Pmsa and its expanded variables to comprehensively describe venous return physiology during post-cardiac arrest management. A general estimating equation model was used to analyse continuous variables split by standard and high mean arterial pressure groups.
Results:
Data from 52 patients in each group were analysed. The driving pressure for venous return, and thus cardiac output, was higher in the high MAP group (p < 0.001) along with a numerically increased estimated stressed intravascular volume (mean difference 0.27 [- 0.014-0.55] L, p = 0.06). The heart efficiency was comparable (p = 0.43) in both the standard and high MAP target groups, suggesting that inotropy was similar despite increased arterial load in the high MAP group (p = 0.01). The efficiency of fluid boluses to increase cardiac output was increased in the higher MAP compared to standard MAP group (mean difference 0.26 [0.08-0.43] fraction units, p = 0.01).
Conclusions:
Calculation of the analogue mean systemic filling pressure and expanded variables using haemodynamic data from the NEUROPROTECT trial demonstrated an increased venous return, and thus cardiac output, as well as increased volume responsiveness associated with targeting a higher MAP. Further studies of the analogue mean systemic filling pressure and its derived variables are warranted to individualise post-resuscitation care and evaluate any clinical benefit associated with this monitoring approach.
