PURPOSE: To evaluate the hemodynamic monitoring capability and safety of a single-use miniaturized transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) probe left in place in ventilated critically ill patients. METHODS: The probe was inserted in 94 patients and designed to be left in place for up to 72 h. Three views were obtained: the superior vena caval transverse, the mid-esophageal four-chamber, and the transgastric mid-papillary short-axis views. Observational data on the feasibility of insertion, complications, image quality, and influence on management were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: No failure of probe insertion was observed. The nasogastric tube had to be removed in 17 % of cases. Image quality was judged as adequate or optimal in 91/94 (97 %) of cases in the superior vena caval view, 89/94 (95 %) of cases in the four-chamber view, and 86/94 (91 %) of cases in the short-axis view. The duration of monitoring was 32 ± 23 h, allowing 2.8 ± 1.6 hemodynamic evaluations per patient that led to a mean of 1.4 ± 1.5 therapeutic changes per patient. Among the 263 hemodynamic assessments, 132 (50 %) had a direct therapeutic impact in 62 patients (66 %). Two patients developed lip ulceration from the probe, and two patients had self-limited gastric bleeding. CONCLUSION: The single-use miniaturized probe could be inserted in all patients. Image quality was acceptable in the majority of cases, and the information derived from the device was useful in making management decisions in patients with hemodynamic failure on ventilatory support. Further studies are needed to confirm the good tolerance and to compare the new device with other hemodynamic monitoring techniques.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the hemodynamic monitoring capability and safety of a single-use miniaturized transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) probe left in place in ventilated critically ill patients. METHODS: The probe was inserted in 94 patients and designed to be left in place for up to 72 h. Three views were obtained: the superior vena caval transverse, the mid-esophageal four-chamber, and the transgastric mid-papillary short-axis views. Observational data on the feasibility of insertion, complications, image quality, and influence on management were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: No failure of probe insertion was observed. The nasogastric tube had to be removed in 17 % of cases. Image quality was judged as adequate or optimal in 91/94 (97 %) of cases in the superior vena caval view, 89/94 (95 %) of cases in the four-chamber view, and 86/94 (91 %) of cases in the short-axis view. The duration of monitoring was 32 ± 23 h, allowing 2.8 ± 1.6 hemodynamic evaluations per patient that led to a mean of 1.4 ± 1.5 therapeutic changes per patient. Among the 263 hemodynamic assessments, 132 (50 %) had a direct therapeutic impact in 62 patients (66 %). Two patients developed lip ulceration from the probe, and two patients had self-limited gastric bleeding. CONCLUSION: The single-use miniaturized probe could be inserted in all patients. Image quality was acceptable in the majority of cases, and the information derived from the device was useful in making management decisions in patients with hemodynamic failure on ventilatory support. Further studies are needed to confirm the good tolerance and to compare the new device with other hemodynamic monitoring techniques.
Authors: Paul H Mayo; Yannick Beaulieu; Peter Doelken; David Feller-Kopman; Christopher Harrod; Adolfo Kaplan; John Oropello; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Olivier Axler; Daniel Lichtenstein; Eric Maury; Michel Slama; Philippe Vignon Journal: Chest Date: 2009-02-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: M A Slama; A Novara; P Van de Putte; B Diebold; A Safavian; M Safar; M Ossart; J Y Fagon Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: G R Bernard; A Artigas; K L Brigham; J Carlet; K Falke; L Hudson; M Lamy; J R Legall; A Morris; R Spragg Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1994-03 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: E Benjamin; K Griffin; A B Leibowitz; A Manasia; J M Oropello; V Geffroy; R DelGiudice; J Hufanda; S Rosen; M Goldman Journal: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth Date: 1998-02 Impact factor: 2.628
Authors: K T Spencer; D Krauss; J Thurn; V Mor-Avi; A Poppas; P Vignon; B G Connor; R M Lang Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 1997-09 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Michel Slama; Bernard Cholley; Gérard Janvier; Philippe Vignon Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2007-11-09 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Karim Chergui; Anne Rabiller; Olivier Peyrouset; Bernard Page; Alain Beauchet; François Jardin Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-06-26 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: S Treskatsch; F Balzer; F Knebel; M Habicher; J P Braun; M Kastrup; H Grubitzsch; K-D Wernecke; C Spies; M Sander Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-06-06 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: P Mayo; R Arntfield; M Balik; P Kory; G Mathis; G Schmidt; M Slama; G Volpicelli; N Xirouchaki; A McLean; A Vieillard-Baron Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2017-03-07 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Daniel De Backer; Jan Bakker; Maurizio Cecconi; Ludhmila Hajjar; Da Wei Liu; Suzanna Lobo; Xavier Monnet; Andrea Morelli; Sheila Neinan Myatra; Azriel Perel; Michael R Pinsky; Bernd Saugel; Jean-Louis Teboul; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2018-05-03 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Emmanuelle Begot; François Dalmay; Caroline Etchecopar; Marc Clavel; Nicolas Pichon; Bruno Francois; Roberto Lang; Philippe Vignon Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 17.440