Abstract.
Objective: Under conditions of tissue hypoxia total CO2 production (VCO2) should be less reduced than O2 consumption (VO2) since an anaerobic CO2 production should occur. Thus the VCO2/VO2 ratio, and hence the venoarterial CO2 tension difference/arteriovenous O2 content difference ratio (ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2), should increase. We tested the value of the ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio in detecting the presence of global anaerobic metabolism as defined by an increase in arterial lactate level above 2 mmol/l (Lac+). Design and setting: Retrospective study over a 17-month period in medical intensive care unit of a university hospital. Patients: We obtained 148 sets of measurements in 89 critically ill patients monitored by a pulmonary artery catheter. Results: The ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio was higher in those with increased (n=73) than in the normolactatemic group (2.0±0.9 vs. 1.1±0.6, p<0.0001). Among all the O2- and CO2-derived parameters the ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio had the highest correlation with the arterial lactate level (r=0.57). Moreover, for a threshold value of 1.4 the ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio predicted significantly better than the other parameters (receiver operating characteristic curves) the presence of hyperlactatemia (positive and negative predictive values of 86% and 80%, respectively). The overall survival estimate at 1 month was greater when the ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio was less than 1.4 on the first set of measurements (38±10% vs. 20±8%, p<0.01). Conclusion: The ΔPCO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio seems a reliable marker of global anaerobic metabolism. Its calculation would be helpful for a better interpretation of pulmonary artery catheter data.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Electronic Publication
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mekontso-Dessap, A., Castelain, V., Anguel, N. et al. Combination of venoarterial PCO2 difference with arteriovenous O2 content difference to detect anaerobic metabolism in patients. Intensive Care Med 28, 272–277 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-002-1215-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-002-1215-8