The results of the present study showed that the diameter of the CCA (measured using bedside ultrasound) increased after intravenous fluid expansion; this increase had a moderate positive correlation to the increase in the CVP, but the ROC curve for the changes in the CCA in predicting a CVP ≥ 8 cmH2O was non-significant (area under curve 0.531, P value = 0.885) in spontaneously breathing adult patients who needed close monitoring of the intravascular fluid volume status after major surgeries.
The most commonly used methods for evaluating the intravascular volume are the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) and CVP. However, PAC is not widely used these days due to the high incidence of complications with its placement (
17). Also, CVP catheterization is invasive, expensive, and time-consuming (
18).
Bedside ultrasonography is widely used in patient management, especially in emergency and intensive care units (
19) because it is simple and noninvasive (
20). Some of the noninvasive methods for volume status assessment include an ultrasonographic assessment of IVC diameter (
8-
10), IVC collapsibility index (
11), IJV or femoral vein collapsibility (
12), IJV/CCA ratio (
13), but no single method is universally accepted since each has its limitations (
21).
Following the intravenous fluid administration to correct hypovolemia, 65% - 85 % of the fluid is accumulated inside veins (
4), and the increased intravascular volume dilates the veins by the intrinsic pressure (
22) while the arterial dilatation is caused by endothelial shear stress that causes an increase in nitric oxide (NO) syntheses and a decrease in endothelin secretion (
23). Also, the activation of baroreflex is involved in the regulation of arterial diameter (
24).
In the current study, the mean CCA diameters were increased by 21 ± 14 % following fluid administration (30 mL/min till reaching 5 mL/kg). This coincides with the result of Hilbert et al. (
14), who reported that CCA diameters increased by 5.0 (1.9 - 10.5) % in comparison to its diameter before fluid bolus.
The mean diastolic CCA diameter (mm) was 5.5 ± 0.7 before fluid administration then increased significantly to 6.6 ± 0.5 after fluid administration (P < 0.001). This was also reported by Hilbert et al. (
14) who found that the diameter of CCA diameter increased significantly after the crystalloid solution from 6.2 (5.4 - 7.1) mm to 6.7 (5.8 - 7.3) mm (P = 0.03) in mechanically ventilated patients after cardiac surgery.
Marik et al. (
25) used carotid artery Doppler ultrasound to assess hemodynamically unstable patients and observe a significant increase in the diameter of the CCA in the fluid responders. Bapat et al. (
26) reported an increase in the diameter of the brachial artery in response to volume loading by a passive leg raising (PLR) maneuver.
In the present study, Pearson correlation analysis showed that the CCA diameter before fluid administration had a significant strong positive correlation to the CVP (P < 0.001, r = 0.8) and showed that the increase in the CCA diameter after fluid administration had a significant moderate positive correlation with the increase in the CVP (P < 0.00, r = 0.4). These findings are contradicted with the results of Bano et al. (
13), who reported that there was no significant correlation between CCA diameter and CVP (r = 0.281, P = 0.051). This contradiction was because Bano et al. (
13) measured the CVP and CCA diameter once; without explaining the relation of these measurements to fluid administration and their study was on a mixed population of the ventilated and non-ventilated patients, while the present study aimed to assess the change in the CVP and CCA diameter in response to fluid on spontaneously breathing patients. In the present study, after fluid administration, the mean CCA diameters increased by 21 ± 14 % and the mean CVP increased by 181.5 ± 64.8% and there was moderate positive correlation; (r = 0.589, P < 0.001) between them. When using ROC analysis to find the accuracy of CCA% to determine the changes in CVP% (CVP ≥ 8), the maximum accuracy was 51%, so it was an invalid test (area under curve 0.513, P value = 0.885) and the overall accuracy of the curve is 51.3% which was an invalid test to discriminate between normal and abnormal CVP. It cannot be used as a clinical discriminator, and the cut of limit cannot be determined.
5.1. Limitations
It is a single-center study conducted on a limited number of spontaneously breathing patients after major surgeries.
5.2. Conclusions
The changes in the CCA diameter is positively correlated with the changes in the CVP values in response to fluid administration, but the cut- off limit cannot be reached. Thus further studies are recommended on multi-centers in different settings and larger population samples to find the cutoff value for the diameter of the CCA that can predict the response to fluid administration.