Comparison of an advanced minimally invasive cardiac output monitoring with a continuous invasive cardiac output monitoring during lung transplantation.

The aim of this study was to compare a continuous non-calibrated left heart cardiac index (CI) measurement by arterial waveform analysis (FloTrac(®)/Vigileo(®)) with a continuous calibrated right heart CI measurement by pulmonary artery thermodilution (CCOmbo-PAC(®)/Vigilance II(®)) for hemodynamic monitoring during lung transplantation. CI was measured simultaneously by both techniques in 13 consecutive lung transplants (n = 4 single-lung transplants, n = 9 sequential double-lung transplants) at distinct time points perioperatively. Linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis with percentage error calculation were used for statistical comparison of CI measurements by both techniques. In this study the FloTrac(®) system underestimated the CI in comparison with the continuous pulmonary arterial thermodilution (p < 0.000). For all measurement pairs we calculated a bias of -0.55 l/min/m(2) with limits of agreement between -2.31 and 1.21 l/min/m(2) and a percentage error of 55 %. The overall correlations before clamping a branch oft the pulmonary artery (percentage error 41 %) and during the clamping periods of a branch oft the pulmonary artery (percentage error 66 %) failed to reached the required percentage error of less than 30 %. We found good agreement of both CI measurements techniques only during the measurement point "15 min after starting the second one-lung ventilation period" (percentage error 30 %). No agreement was found during all other measurement points. This pilot study shows for the first time that the CI of the FloTrac(®) system is not comparable with the continuous pulmonary-artery thermodilution during lung transplantation including the time periods without clamping a branch of the pulmonary artery. Arterial waveform and continuous pulmonary artery thermodilution are, therefore, not interchangeable during these complex operations.