Zaher Fanari1, Matthew Grove2, Anitha Rajamanickam3, Sumaya Hammami4, Cassie Walls4, Paul Kolm5, Mitchell Saltzberg4, William S Weintraub6, Andrew J Doorey6. 1. Division of Cardiology, University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, KS, USA. 2. Section of Cardiology, Carolina East Medical Center, New Bern, NC, USA. 3. Division of Cardiology, Mount Sinai Heart, New York, NY, USA. 4. Section of Cardiology, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE, USA. 5. Value Institute, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE, USA. 6. Section of Cardiology, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE, USA; Value Institute, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate assessment of cardiac output (CO) is essential for the hemodynamic assessment of aortic valve area (AVA). Estimation of oxygen consumption (VO2) and Thermodilution (TD) is employed in many cardiac catheterization laboratories (CCL) given the historically cumbersome nature of direct continuous VO2 measurement, the "gold standard" for this technique. A portable facemask device simplifies the direct continuous measurement of VO2, allowing for relatively rapid and continuous assessment of CO and AVA. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventeen consecutive patients undergoing right heart catheterization had simultaneous determination of CO by both direct continuous and assumed VO2 and TD. Assessments were only made when a plateau of VO2 had occurred. All measurements of direct continuous and assumed VO2, as well as, TD CO were obtained in triplicate. RESULTS: Direct continuous VO2 CO and assumed VO2 CO correlated poorly (R= 0.57; ICC =0.59). Direct continuous VO2 CO and TD CO also correlated poorly (R= 0.51; ICC=0.60). Similarly AVA derived from direct continuous VO2 correlated poorly with those of assumed VO2 (R= 0.68; ICC=0.55) and TD (R=0.66, ICC=0.60). Repeated direct continuous VO2 CO and AVA measurements were extremely correlated and reproducible [(R=0.93; ICC=0.96) and (R=0.99; ICC>0.99) respectively], suggesting that this was the most reliable measurement of CO. CONCLUSIONS: CO calculated from direct continuous VO2 measurement varies substantially from both assumed VO2 and TD based CO, which are widely used in most CCL. These differences may significantly impact the CO and AVA measurements. Furthermore, continuous, rather than average, measurement of VO2 appears to give highly reproducible results.
BACKGROUND: Accurate assessment of cardiac output (CO) is essential for the hemodynamic assessment of aortic valve area (AVA). Estimation of oxygen consumption (VO2) and Thermodilution (TD) is employed in many cardiac catheterization laboratories (CCL) given the historically cumbersome nature of direct continuous VO2 measurement, the "gold standard" for this technique. A portable facemask device simplifies the direct continuous measurement of VO2, allowing for relatively rapid and continuous assessment of CO and AVA. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seventeen consecutive patients undergoing right heart catheterization had simultaneous determination of CO by both direct continuous and assumed VO2 and TD. Assessments were only made when a plateau of VO2 had occurred. All measurements of direct continuous and assumed VO2, as well as, TD CO were obtained in triplicate. RESULTS: Direct continuous VO2 CO and assumed VO2 CO correlated poorly (R= 0.57; ICC =0.59). Direct continuous VO2 CO and TD CO also correlated poorly (R= 0.51; ICC=0.60). Similarly AVA derived from direct continuous VO2 correlated poorly with those of assumed VO2 (R= 0.68; ICC=0.55) and TD (R=0.66, ICC=0.60). Repeated direct continuous VO2 CO and AVA measurements were extremely correlated and reproducible [(R=0.93; ICC=0.96) and (R=0.99; ICC>0.99) respectively], suggesting that this was the most reliable measurement of CO. CONCLUSIONS: CO calculated from direct continuous VO2 measurement varies substantially from both assumed VO2 and TD based CO, which are widely used in most CCL. These differences may significantly impact the CO and AVA measurements. Furthermore, continuous, rather than average, measurement of VO2 appears to give highly reproducible results.
Authors: Zachary M Gertz; Amresh Raina; William O'Donnell; Brian D McCauley; Charlene Shellenberger; Daniel M Kolansky; Robert L Wilensky; Paul R Forfia; Howard C Herrmann Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2012-05-29 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Jia Li; Andrew Bush; Ingram Schulze-Neick; Daniel J Penny; Andrew N Redington; Lara S Shekerdemian Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Nikhil Narang; Jennifer T Thibodeau; Benjamin D Levine; M Odette Gore; Colby R Ayers; Richard A Lange; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Aslan T Turer; James A de Lemos; Darren K McGuire Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-09-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jennifer Rutledge; Andrew Bush; Lara Shekerdemian; Ingram Schulze-Neick; Daniel Penny; Sally Cai; Jia Li Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 4.749