Continuous and intermittent cardiac output measurement in hyperdynamic conditions: pulmonary artery catheter vs. lithium dilution technique

被引:72
作者
Costa, Maria Gabriella [1 ]
Della Rocca, Giorgio [1 ]
Chiarandini, Paolo [1 ]
Mattelig, Silvia [1 ]
Pompei, Livia [1 ]
Barriga, Mauricio Sainz [2 ]
Reynolds, Toby [4 ]
Cecconi, Maurizio [1 ]
Pietropaoli, Paolo [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Udine, Azienda Osped, Clin Anestesia & Rianimaz, I-33100 Udine, Italy
[2] Univ Udine, Dept Surg, Transplant Unit, I-33100 Udine, Italy
[3] Univ Roma La Sapienza, Dept Anesthesia & Intens Care Med, Rome, Italy
[4] Univ London St Georges Hosp, Sch Med, London SW17 0RE, England
关键词
continuous cardiac output; lithium dilution technique; pulmonary artery catheter; pulse waveform analysis;
D O I
10.1007/s00134-007-0878-6
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Objective: This study aimed to assess the level of agreement of both intermittent cardiac output monitoring by the lithium dilution technique (COLi) and continuous cardiac output monitoring (PulseCO(Li)) using the arterial pressure waveform with intermittent thermodilution using a pulmonary artery catheter (COPAC). Design: Prospective, single-center evaluation. Setting: University Hospital Intensive Care Unit. Patients: Patients (n = 23) receiving liver transplantation. Intervention: Pulmonary artery catheters were placed in all patients and COPAC was determined using thermodilution. COLi and PulseCO(Li) measurements were made using the LiDCO system. Measurements and main results: Data were collected after intensive care unit admission and every 8 h until the 48th hour. A total of 151 COPAC, COLi and PulseCO(Li) measurements were analysed. Bias and 95% limit of agreement were 0.11 lmin(-1) and -1.84 to + 2.05 lmin(-1) for COPAC vs. COLi (r = 0.88) resulting in an overall percentage error of 15.6%. Bias and 95% limit of agreement for COPAC vs. PulseCO(Li) were 0.29 lmin(-1) and -1.87 to + 2.46 lmin(-1) (r = 0.85) with a percentage error of 16.8%. Subgroup analysis revealed a percentage error of 15.7% for COPAC vs. COLi and 15.1% for COPAC vs. PulseCO(Li) for data pairs less than 8 lmin(-1), and percentage errors of 15.5% and 18.5% respectively for data pairs higher than 8 lmin(-1). Conclusion: In patients with hyperdynamic circulation, intermittent and continuous CO values determined using the LiDCO system showed good agreement with those obtained by intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution.
引用
收藏
页码:257 / 263
页数:7
相关论文
共 31 条
[21]   Comparing methods of clinical measurement: Reporting standards for Bland and Altman analysis [J].
Mantha, S ;
Roizen, MF ;
Fleisher, LA ;
Thisted, R ;
Foss, J .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2000, 90 (03) :593-602
[22]   Assessment of lithium dilution cardiac output as a technique for measurement of cardiac output in dogs [J].
Mason, DJ ;
O'Grady, M ;
Woods, JP ;
McDonell, W .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH, 2001, 62 (08) :1255-1261
[23]   HEMODYNAMIC CORRELATES OF OUTCOME IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING ORTHOTOPIC LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION - EVIDENCE FOR EARLY POSTOPERATIVE MYOCARDIAL DEPRESSION [J].
NASRAWAY, SA ;
KLEIN, RD ;
SPANIER, TB ;
ROHRER, RJ ;
FREEMAN, RB ;
RAND, WM ;
BENOTTI, PN .
CHEST, 1995, 107 (01) :218-224
[24]   Early goal-directed therapy after major surgery reduces complications and duration of hospital stay. A randomised, controlled trial [ISRCTN38797445] [J].
Pearse, R ;
Dawson, D ;
Fawcett, J ;
Rhodes, A ;
Grounds, RM ;
Bennett, ED .
CRITICAL CARE, 2005, 9 (06) :R687-R693
[25]   Equipment review:: An appraisal of the LiDCO™plus method of measuring cardiac output [J].
Pearse, RM ;
Ikram, K ;
Barry, J .
CRITICAL CARE, 2004, 8 (03) :190-193
[26]   Continuous cardiac output monitoring with pulse contour analysis: A comparison with lithium indicator dilution cardiac output measurement [J].
Pittman, J ;
Bar-Yosef, S ;
SumPing, J ;
Sherwood, M ;
Mark, J .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2005, 33 (09) :2015-2021
[27]  
Rhodes A, 2005, UPD INT CAR, V42, P183
[28]  
ROCCA GD, 2002, BRIT J ANAESTH, V88, P350
[29]  
Rödig G, 1999, BRIT J ANAESTH, V82, P525
[30]  
SONI N, 1996, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V313, P173