And the Swan controversy continues ...

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

opr8n

Full Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
271
Reaction score
2
Case: new consult from IM in the MICU for 70 y/o pt, toxic megacolon, wbc 30 with 30% bands, peritoneal signs, maxed on pressors through a peripheral IV, no central line, no a-line, fluids running at 70 cc/hr, pt has a h/o cardiomyopathy, currently getting IV lasix for "low urine output"

would you put in a swan before going to the OR? ....

ok, go!

Members don't see this ad.
 
No, but I would put in central and arterial lines.
 
A preop echo or even better an intraop TEE look would be my move. I rarely use the swan, go by clinical parameters, plus central venous blood gas
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Case: new consult from IM in the MICU for 70 y/o pt, toxic megacolon, wbc 30 with 30% bands, peritoneal signs, maxed on pressors through a peripheral IV, no central line, no a-line, fluids running at 70 cc/hr, pt has a h/o cardiomyopathy, currently getting IV lasix for "low urine output"

would you put in a swan before going to the OR? ....

ok, go!

This is a joke right? Did medicine really try to float a swan before the OR? Why don't they just push 60 mEq of KCl and be done with it. The guy needs central venous access and an A-line while they are opening the OR, and then whack that colon out. I wish I could say I hadn't seen the lasix drip prescribed for oliguria secondary to septic shock, but alas that would be a lie.
 
Ugh you just made my brain hurt...
He could've stopped at "new consult from the MICU" and I could have filled in the rest. It's a shame too, because the MICU where I went to med school seemed like it was really outstanding, but there are numerous fundamental flaws with how they run the MICU here, and it's a bad place to be. I can't say I've ever seen someone maxed out on pressors through a peripheral line though.
 
Scenarios such as this is why there are several disease processes which mandate a surgical consult at my facility (despite the fact that they rarely require any sort of surgical intervention). c-diff isn't one of those, but thankfully we really don't see the bad ones often (I can think of only one colectomy that was done since I have been here, and it was more a smoldering, not getting better thing). I'm not sure why you would bring up swan when there are other simpler methods which could be rapidly deployed to help guide resuscitation. Now, if after the central line, a-line, fluids to get a CVP >10, probably steroids (unless the pressors come off just by giving the fluids, I would say he has relative adrenal insufficiency), and source control the guy is still looking like crap-then you can argue about whether to swan (versus getting an echo, or having the level of care discussion lead to a deescalation)
 
Ah, the often-too-commonly-seen MICU scenario where the patient's IVF rate is less than the pressor drip rate. And with a noninvasive BP cuff as well!

Don't even get me started on the Lasix.
 
Case: new consult from IM in the MICU for 70 y/o pt, toxic megacolon, wbc 30 with 30% bands, peritoneal signs, maxed on pressors through a peripheral IV, no central line, no a-line, fluids running at 70 cc/hr, pt has a h/o cardiomyopathy, currently getting IV lasix for "low urine output"

would you put in a swan before going to the OR? ....

ok, go!

I don't think the addition of a PA cath is going to be very high yield, given the current management.
 
I don't think it's going to add much to the particulars of this case as it's not really an elective situation, but it's been suggested a number of times (1,2, 3) that preoperative saline loading decreases morbidity. Essentially what you do is use the Swan-Ganz to map out the Starling Curve to find the sweet spot for preload. Whether this elegant and precise physiology display is better then just bolusing some random amount in holding is questionable, but it is important. It can be a big deal on bowel prepped patients who are dramatically volume depleted most times.
 
I guess the use of PA catheters are slowing dying around the country from the reponses. Atleast where I trained they were a very commonplace.
The proponents of PAC say they are important b/c:
1. CVP is unreliable and not reflective of preload (LVEDV), PAWP is much better to assess volume status
2. Tells you about RHF if present
3. Tells you about CI or function of the heart
4. Svo2 is very helpful to tell you what is happening at the cellular level regarding oxygen extraction
5. My fav: the PAC is a diagnostic tool, not a therapeutic intervention, its not going to change the pts outcome if you dont use it for the rightr reasons or dont know what to do with the numbers.
 
Intraoperative esophageal doppler monitoring
 
I don't see the point of keeping the guy in the unit for a couple hours in order to volume load the patient according to physiological parameters. Admittedly, I'm relatively new at this. I would just tank him up and take him to the OR. The optimal volume loading does not seem worth the tradeoff in delayed source control in a patient who is in frank shock. If there is doubt, why not just err on the side of more fluid. This guy will probably be intubated postop anyway. You can diurese him in the unit later.
 
4. Svo2 is very helpful to tell you what is happening at the cellular level regarding oxygen extraction.

This is what I miss most about the Swan. I used it to guide resuscitation and determine if the patient needed transfusion. I occasionally used the special CVL that measured SvO2 when my institution was part of a sepsis trial, but I found it less reliable.

In my last 2 years of residency, I floated a total of 3-4 swans....as opposed to my first 3 years when the numbers were much higher....
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I occasionally used the special CVL that measured SvO2 when my institution was part of a sepsis trial, but I found it less reliable.

The PreSep catheter?

In med school and early on in residency all I seemed to do in the ICU was line people up (a-line, CVL, Swan). Then we started switching to these high-tech combo thingies (PreSep, CVL/Swan combo, Vigileo). Now I only see the Swan during cardiac cases.
 
The entirety of my personal swan experience is on my cardiothoracic rotation. I could do it if I had to, but I certainly wouldn't feel really comfortable with it. This of course has the effect of making me less likely to want to do one, which further decreases my level of comfort, etc.
 
The PreSep catheter?

That's the one! I didn't mind it overall, but outside of the SICU or CTICU, nurses always flopped around with it. Also, it was stiffer than a regular CVL, so I had to create a softer curve with IJs (subclavians didn't matter).

I also used the vigileo/flotrac for CO/CI and SVV. Of course, before I had ever used a calculated SVV, I used variations in arterial waveform to guide resuscitation....a quick, easy, and effective eyeball test.

Either way, I'm done with that stuff. UNMC has a closed SICU, so I am officially retired from any major critical care decision making. The only CVLs I'll be placing are for portacaths and hickmans.
 
cpants... Are you a junior resident? If so .. You very advanced!

I totally agree with you! It takes a lot to realize that what a patient like this doesn't need is a prolonged course of mental masturbation. What he needs is a quick optimization and prompt surgical removal of his colon.

If this was a consult on my service, I would promptly get him lined up while empirically loading him with fluids 4-6 liters to start with the goal of getting him to the operating room table within an hour or two. If he comes off the pressors with that fluid... Great.

He would get broad spectrum (zosyn or carbapenim in patient this sick). The LASIx would be stopped the second I saw him.

While true volume overload has morbidity, this is more relevant in the post op And medium term of a patient in the Icu. This patient clinically is volume depleted period... Doesn't matter if he has heart failure or not. That can be tweaked depending on his status after the thing killing him (his colon) is removed.

The purpose of loading him with fluids preop is because a volume depleted patient is much more dangerous to deal with that a euvolemic or slighty hypervolemic septic patient.

Now... If you prioritize the things I mentioned (lining him up and empirically giving him 4-6 liters) and get him to OR promptly, and AFTER that stuff is in place and u wanna see what's going on with his heart... A quick bedside transthoracic can tell u a lot.

But like I said.... It doesn't matter.... If this guy is hyperdynamic from his sepsis than you are doing the right thing. If his heart isn't working well and he's at risk for volume overload then keep that in mind post op..... Your 4-6 liters is not going to do anything but help this guy who, overall, is clinically hypovolemic just from history ( toxic colon, third spacing, inadequately resuscitated before u saw him, not overtly edematous on a pressor and with low urine output.). Jeez 4-6 liters is probably a spit in the wind for this guy!


What I like about your comment cpants is it demonstrates clinical maturity. Sometimes u have to just step back and think about the big picture and really prioritize ( ie this guy needs the operating room NOW)


My fellow sdn'ers agree?
 
I'd place a central line for access and to measure ScVO2, but I wouldn't look at CVP. From what I've read its as good as flipping a coin
 
Yeah that's correct .. See the tale of 7 mares by Marik in the journal Chest
 
Nice reference! Love the "7 mares" study.

Edit: Marik PE et al, Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? Chest 2008; 134: 172-8 for anyone that's interested.
 
Chest. 2008 Jul;134(1):172-8.
Marik is a funny guy. here's the full ref. Thanks for the correction



Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares.
 
My thoughts would be its foolish to operate on this patient. He has on the determinants of severe C.dif (WBC greater than 15, resp failure, vasopressor, AKI). With one or two of those his mortality is 50% given his comorbidities, given all of them he is pushing 100%. I bet he also had ACS. I would be frank with the ICU, and the family; damage control, open abdomen, eventual ileostomy, trach, and peg. Best case he struggles through 3 months in the hospital and then lives in a SNF for the rest of his life, or he just dies. Would offer a surgery if they could resuscitate him, and give specific goals ie reversing the coagulopathy, and down to maybe two pressors. They could use whatever catheter they wanted. This proves previous studies that patients who get a resuscitation do better than those who don't regardless of the type of catheter. That being said they fail on surviving sepsis, and why bother with a swan. Cardiomyopathy is a global dysfunction, and I find them only to be helpful in patients with right heart failure, and pulmonary HTN.

Unless they max concentrated their pressors his fluids are likely running 200-250/hr.

So what happened?
 
My thoughts would be its foolish to operate on this patient. He has on the determinants of severe C.dif (WBC greater than 15, resp failure, vasopressor, AKI). With one or two of those his mortality is 50% given his comorbidities, given all of them he is pushing 100%. I bet he also had ACS. I would be frank with the ICU, and the family; damage control, open abdomen, eventual ileostomy, trach, and peg. Best case he struggles through 3 months in the hospital and then lives in a SNF for the rest of his life, or he just dies. Would offer a surgery if they could resuscitate him, and give specific goals ie reversing the coagulopathy, and down to maybe two pressors. They could use whatever catheter they wanted. This proves previous studies that patients who get a resuscitation do better than those who don't regardless of the type of catheter. That being said they fail on surviving sepsis, and why bother with a swan. Cardiomyopathy is a global dysfunction, and I find them only to be helpful in patients with right heart failure, and pulmonary HTN.

Unless they max concentrated their pressors his fluids are likely running 200-250/hr.

So what happened?

While I agree the prognosis is poor, this is potentially survivable with source control. 100% mortality without. Comfort care would definitely be a reasonable option at this point, but I don't think sitting in the ICU for a half a day getting fluids and pressors is reasonable. Either you try to save him, or you don't. Would love to see the studies you reference.
 
While I agree the prognosis is poor, this is potentially survivable with source control. 100% mortality without. Comfort care would definitely be a reasonable option at this point, but I don't think sitting in the ICU for a half a day getting fluids and pressors is reasonable. Either you try to save him, or you don't. Would love to see the studies you reference.


yeah i totally agree with cpants.

If this patient became septic and was expeditionally taken to OR, then his chance of having viable quality of life post op is not crazy low. Now, if he sits w/non operative therapy for 24 hours and gets progressive organ dysfunction, mortality and good post op outcome chances go down.

But this patient is CERTAINLY not an automatic DNR/DNI don't operative kinda patient!
 
yeah i totally agree with cpants.

If this patient became septic and was expeditionally taken to OR, then his chance of having viable quality of life post op is not crazy low. Now, if he sits w/non operative therapy for 24 hours and gets progressive organ dysfunction, mortality and good post op outcome chances go down.

But this patient is CERTAINLY not an automatic DNR/DNI don't operative kinda patient!

I disagree. And from the sound of it, the patient was a guaranteed mortality, with or without operation.
 
I disagree. And from the sound of it, the patient was a guaranteed mortality, with or without operation.

Why? The only comorbidity mentioned was cardiomyopathy, the severity of which was not mentioned. Toxic megacolon/fulminant c. diff is survivable. If he is too far gone now it is only because they waited too long to operate in the first place.
 
My thoughts would be its foolish to operate on this patient.

I disagree. And from the sound of it, the patient was a guaranteed mortality, with or without operation.

We are constantly taught as residents that we need to act quickly in toxic C-Diff colitis, and if we don't get their colon in a bucket before they start to spiral downward, then it's too late to do anything.

However, I think it's less clear than that in real life. The main reason is that often we don't have an accurate clinical picture. The patient the OP briefly described sounded like he wasn't properly worked up or managed...sometimes placing appropriate lines and giving appropriate fluids and antibiotics can quickly reduce the need for "max pressors," and we'll find that the patient wasn't as far gone as it seemed.

Also, I've seen a couple patients get super sick from C-diff, including multiple pressors, who respond dramatically to colectomy and recover after source control. Patient selection is obviously important...one of these was a 25yo post-partum female who could take insults better than an old man with cardiomyopathy.

It's tough to say for sure based on the OP's description what to do next. If the patient is truly past the point where he would benefit from surgery, then it's appropriate to do nothing, and I've recommended this before, even when it's a tough situation (45 yo HIV+ mother of 2 comes to mind). However, often I feel obligated to get some more information before giving up. It doesn't take long to drop in some lines, see how hypotensive the patient truly is, and see if he is fluid responsive.

I'm sure many SDNers are familiar with the newer literature supporting loop ileostomy with Vanco through the efferent loop....I've never been brave enough to do it, but I'm definitely intrigued.....after all, how much of our quoted high morbidity and mortality come from the procedure itself?
 
We are constantly taught as residents that we need to act quickly in toxic C-Diff colitis, and if we don't get their colon in a bucket before they start to spiral downward, then it's too late to do anything.

However, I think it's less clear than that in real life. The main reason is that often we don't have an accurate clinical picture. The patient the OP briefly described sounded like he wasn't properly worked up or managed...sometimes placing appropriate lines and giving appropriate fluids and antibiotics can quickly reduce the need for "max pressors," and we'll find that the patient wasn't as far gone as it seemed.

Also, I've seen a couple patients get super sick from C-diff, including multiple pressors, who respond dramatically to colectomy and recover after source control. Patient selection is obviously important...one of these was a 25yo post-partum female who could take insults better than an old man with cardiomyopathy.

It's tough to say for sure based on the OP's description what to do next. If the patient is truly past the point where he would benefit from surgery, then it's appropriate to do nothing, and I've recommended this before, even when it's a tough situation (45 yo HIV+ mother of 2 comes to mind). However, often I feel obligated to get some more information before giving up. It doesn't take long to drop in some lines, see how hypotensive the patient truly is, and see if he is fluid responsive.

I'm sure many SDNers are familiar with the newer literature supporting loop ileostomy with Vanco through the efferent loop....I've never been brave enough to do it, but I'm definitely intrigued.....after all, how much of our quoted high morbidity and mortality come from the procedure itself?

I think it is a valid thing to consider comfort care in any super sick patient, especially elderly patients with many comorbidities. Doesn't mean I want to write everyone off (contrary to the beliefs of some people I know), just that I recognize that not everyone needs to die with an incision on them. And even when you do go for operation, I think it is important to have a back up plan (and involve the patient in it whenever possible). I don't think enough people feel comfortable with this

As for the loop ileostomy, are you supposed to place a catheter during the surgery and secure it somehow (just trying to get a picture in my head of the logistics-making sure the meds are going down the right direction, controlling the succus adequately without stuff leaking all over). Maybe I'm overthinking it.
 
I'm sure many SDNers are familiar with the newer literature supporting loop ileostomy with Vanco through the efferent loop....I've never been brave enough to do it, but I'm definitely intrigued.....after all, how much of our quoted high morbidity and mortality come from the procedure itself?

We did this recently. The patient continued to do poorly and proceeded to TAC the next day. The patient is still in-house, but out of the ICU. Unfortunately, the kidneys suffered injury and have yet to show significant signs of recovery. Has been getting intermittent HD and now the nephrologist is requesting a permacath. I can't say if this would be the case if they'd gone straight to total colectomy but I think people around here might be a bit gunshy of trying it again soon.
 
Thank you for the thoughtful responses, and to the orginal post for the discussion.

We do not have an excellant clinical picture here. My vision was someone on at least 4 vasoactives, intubated, with AKI rapidly approaching failure. I also assumed (maybe by mistake) that he had been in this state for more than a couple of minutes, and I also bet he had ACS.

I would not pull any punches with the family or MICU staff. The family needs to know how bad things are. At 80 years old an a better clinical picture he is not going to be discharged to home, and the ileostomy is not easy to manage that age. I think if they want a full court press you are wrong to operate, but I would make him prove there is a glimer of hope ie the pressors come down, and doesn't have progression of MOSF. The operation is the easy part it the postop, and rehab that is tough

The Neal paper on ileostomy is very interesting. I think the important thing when considering that paper are the previous papers from PITT about c.dif. I don't have their references in hand but as I recall the Neal paper had 40 patients over 2 years that all did really well. The previous two series (really one series two papers) had about 40 patients over 10 years that require operation. I think they were a little aggressive with ileostomy and we are talking about two different patient groups.

Here are a few papers I had on my Jump drive about C.dif. I had a bunch more but lost my old thumb drive. But these are what I have more recently reviewed. Nothing to interesting other than the Neal paper on loop ileostomy. Didn't look for the previous reports out of Pitt, but he references them if I recall.

Byrn. Arch Surg. 2008;143(2)
Kelly. NEJM. 2008;359
Sailhammer. Arch Surg .2009;144(5)
Neal. Ann Surg2011;254
 
Top