Literature DB >> 12226045

Lack of agreement between thermodilution and fick cardiac output in critically ill patients.

Vinay K Dhingra1, John C Fenwick, Keith R Walley, Dean R Chittock, Juan J Ronco.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: s: Individual comparison of cardiac output via intermittent thermodilution and Fick technique over a wide range of cardiac outputs.
DESIGN: Prospective clinical investigation.
SETTING: Multidisciplinary ICUs of two teaching hospitals in Vancouver, British Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen critically ill patients who had pulmonary and systemic arterial catheters and in whom active support was being withdrawn.
INTERVENTIONS: Measurement of thermodilution cardiac output and calculation of Fick cardiac output while support was withdrawn. Active support was withdrawn in a three-step process: removal of vasopressors followed by decrease in fraction of inspired oxygen to 0.21, and finally removal of mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND
RESULTS: Simultaneous Fick and thermodilution cardiac outputs were obtained over a wide range. Fick calculated cardiac outputs were obtained using the Fick equation with oxygen uptake (O(2)) being measured with indirect calorimetry. O(2) determinations were made using five measurements over 5 min, with the mean being used for subsequent analysis. Thermodilution cardiac outputs were determined by the mean of five measurements, with the first being discarded. Coefficient of variation was calculated for the O(2) and thermodilution cardiac outputs. One hundred thirty-six simultaneous cardiac outputs were obtained in 18 patients with a mean APACHE (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation) II score of 25.5. The range of cardiac outputs was 1.39 to 16.95 L/min. Linear regression analysis found a good correlation of the data sets, with an R of 0.85. Bias and precision calculations found a bias of - 0.17 L/min with the upper and lower limits of agreement being 2.96 L/min and - 3.30 L/min, respectively. In patients with high cardiac outputs (> 7 L/min), the bias was - 1.90 with the limits of agreement being 1.87 L/min and - 5.67 L/min. The coefficient of variation for O(2) was 4.6% and for thermodilution cardiac output was 7.75%.
CONCLUSIONS: There was good consistency of each of the measurements with a low coefficient of variation. The bias for the whole group was small, but the limits of agreement extended into a clinically relevant area, resulting in a lack of agreement. In patients with high cardiac outputs, the Fick tended to consistently produce higher cardiac outputs compared to thermodilution, suggesting a systematic error.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12226045     DOI: 10.1378/chest.122.3.990

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  17 in total

1.  What's in a beat?

Authors:  Mervyn Singer
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring during exercise testing: Nexfin pulse contour analysis compared to an inert gas rebreathing method and respired gas analysis.

Authors:  Sebastiaan A Bartels; Wim J Stok; Rick Bezemer; Remco J Boksem; Jeroen van Goudoever; Thomas G V Cherpanath; Johannes J van Lieshout; Berend E Westerhof; John M Karemaker; Can Ince
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2011-10-15       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  Cardiac output measurement by pulse dye densitometry: comparison with pulmonary artery thermodilution in post-cardiac surgery patients.

Authors:  Martijn Kroon; A B Johan Groeneveld; Yvo M Smulders
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2006-01-25       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  Comparison of electrical velocimetry and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the non-invasive determination of cardiac output.

Authors:  Frederik Trinkmann; Manuel Berger; Christina Doesch; Theano Papavassiliu; Stefan O Schoenberg; Martin Borggrefe; Jens J Kaden; Joachim Saur
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2015-06-27       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  Continuous non-invasive cardiac output monitoring during exercise: validation of electrical cardiometry with Fick and thermodilution methods.

Authors:  Y H Liu; B P Dhakal; C Keesakul; R M Kacmarek; G D Lewis; Y Jiang
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 9.166

6.  Stroke volume equation for impedance cardiography.

Authors:  D P Bernstein; H J M Lemmens
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.602

7.  A comparison of the non-invasive ultrasonic cardiac output monitor (USCOM) with the oesophageal Doppler monitor during major abdominal surgery.

Authors:  Luke E Hodgson; Lui G Forni; Richard Venn; Theophilus L Samuels; Howard G Wakeling
Journal:  J Intensive Care Soc       Date:  2015-10-14

8.  Electrical velocimetry as a tool for measuring cardiac output in small infants after heart surgery.

Authors:  Oswin Grollmuss; Serge Demontoux; André Capderou; Alain Serraf; Emre Belli
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Cardiac Output Assessment in Patients Supported with Left Ventricular Assist Device: Discordance Between Thermodilution and Indirect Fick Cardiac Output Measurements.

Authors:  David M Tehrani; Jonathan Grinstein; Sara Kalantari; Gene Kim; Nitasha Sarswat; Sirtaz Adatya; Gabriel Sayer; Nir Uriel
Journal:  ASAIO J       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 2.872

10.  Dynamic Modulation of Device-Arterial Coupling to Determine Cardiac Output and Vascular Resistance.

Authors:  Steven P Keller; Brian Y Chang; Qing Tan; Zhengyang Zhang; Ahmad El Katerji; Elazer R Edelman
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 3.934

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.