Literature DB >> 16570186

Estimation of cardiac output in a pharmacological trial using a simple method based on arterial blood pressure signal waveform: a comparison with pulmonary thermodilution and echocardiographic methods.

Jani Penttilä1, Amir Snapir, Erkki Kentala, Juha Koskenvuo, Jussi Posti, Mika Scheinin, Harry Scheinin, Tom Kuusela.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac output (CO) has traditionally been measured using invasive techniques, which involve an element of risk. Thus, a reliable less-invasive method for determining CO would be very valuable for research use. We tested whether simple analysis of the arterial pulse waveform, not requiring large-vessel catheterisation or expensive equipment, could provide an estimate of CO that is accurate enough for pharmacological studies.
METHODS: We measured CO in 11 healthy male subjects who received low and high doses of dexmedetomidine (alpha2-adrenoceptor agonist), using pulse contour analysis, echocardiography and pulmonary thermodilution techniques.
RESULTS: At baseline, these methods gave the following mean (SD) values of CO: 6.18 (1.59), 5.22 (1.35) and 7.03 (1.54) l/min, respectively. High-dose dexmedetomidine reduced CO to 4.50 (0.68), 3.65 (0.65) and 4.80 (0.89) l/min, corresponding to -25 (14) %, -28 (12) % and -30 (14) % reductions from baseline, respectively. The pulse contour method described these dexmedetomidine-induced changes in CO very similarly to the thermodilution and echocardiographic methods. The limits of agreement [bias (2SD)] were 0.55 (2.55) and -0.10 (2.04) l/min, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The minimally invasive pulse contour analysis technique might be suitable for pharmacological studies for the detection of major drug-induced reductions in CO.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16570186     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-006-0115-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  29 in total

1.  Cardiac output determined by echocardiography in patients with cirrhosis: comparison with the indicator dilution technique.

Authors:  Ulrik B Andersen; Søren Møller; Flemming Bendtsen; Jens H Henriksen
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.566

Review 2.  Non-invasive cardiac output monitoring.

Authors:  D A Hett; M M Jonas
Journal:  Intensive Crit Care Nurs       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.072

3.  Cardiac output monitoring: aortic transpulmonary thermodilution and pulse contour analysis agree with standard thermodilution methods in patients undergoing lung transplantation.

Authors:  Giorgio Della Rocca; Maria Gabriella Costa; Cecilia Coccia; Livia Pompei; Pierangelo Di Marco; Vincenzo Vilardi; Paolo Pietropaoli
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2003 Aug-Sep       Impact factor: 5.063

4.  Estimation of cardiac output by noninvasive echocardiographic techniques in the critically ill subject.

Authors:  A S McLean; A Needham; D Stewart; R Parkin
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 1.669

5.  Measurement of cardiac output by transesophageal echocardiography in mechanically ventilated patients. Comparison with thermodilution.

Authors:  P Estagnasié; K Djedaini; L Mier; F Coste; D Dreyfuss
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Clinical assessment of cardiac output.

Authors:  J Conway
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  Validation of a Doppler technique for beat-to-beat measurement of cardiac output.

Authors:  N Mehta; V I Iyawe; A R Cummin; S Bayley; K B Saunders; E D Bennett
Journal:  Clin Sci (Lond)       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 6.124

9.  Comparison of esophageal Doppler, pulse contour analysis, and real-time pulmonary artery thermodilution for the continuous measurement of cardiac output.

Authors:  Berthold Bein; Frank Worthmann; Peter H Tonner; Andrea Paris; Markus Steinfath; Jürgen Hedderich; Jens Scholz
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.628

10.  Effects of terbutaline on peripheral vascular resistance and arterial compliance.

Authors:  Tom A Kuusela; Tuomas T Jartti; Kari U O Tahvanainen; Timo J Kaila
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.105

View more
  5 in total

1.  A comparison of echocardiography to invasive measurement in the evaluation of pulmonary arterial hypertension in a rat model.

Authors:  Juha W Koskenvuo; Rachel Mirsky; Yan Zhang; Franca S Angeli; Sarah Jahn; Tero-Pekka Alastalo; Nelson B Schiller; Andrew J Boyle; Kanu Chatterjee; Teresa De Marco; Yerem Yeghiazarians
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-02-07       Impact factor: 2.357

2.  The Effect of Intraoperative Fluid Management According to Stroke Volume Variation on Postoperative Bowel Function Recovery in Colorectal Cancer Surgery.

Authors:  Ki-Young Lee; Young-Chul Yoo; Jin-Sun Cho; Wootaek Lee; Ji-Young Kim; Myoung-Hwa Kim
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-04-25       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  Comparison of uncalibrated arterial waveform analysis in cardiac surgery patients with thermodilution cardiac output measurements.

Authors:  Michael Sander; Claudia D Spies; Herko Grubitzsch; Achim Foer; Marcus Müller; Christian von Heymann
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 9.097

4.  Sympathetic activation in heart failure with reduced and mildly reduced ejection fraction: the role of aetiology.

Authors:  Réka Urbancsek; Zoltán Csanádi; Ildikó Noémi Forgács; Tímea Bianka Papp; Judit Boczán; Judit Barta; Csaba Jenei; László Nagy; László Rudas
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-09-07

5.  Stroke volume variation for prediction of fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

Authors:  Cheng Li; Fu-qing Lin; Shu-kun Fu; Guo-qiang Chen; Xiao-hu Yang; Chun-yan Zhu; Li-jun Zhang; Quan Li
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 3.738

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.