Literature DB >> 29621027

Cardiac output monitoring: how to choose the optimal method for the individual patient.

Bernd Saugel1, Jean-Louis Vincent2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the different methods available for the assessment of cardiac output (CO) and describe their specific indications in intensive care and perioperative medicine. RECENT
FINDINGS: In critically ill patients, persistent circulatory shock after initial resuscitation is an indication for the assessment of CO to monitor the response to fluids and vasoactive agents. In patients with circulatory shock associated with right ventricular dysfunction, pulmonary artery hypertension, or acute respiratory distress syndrome, invasive CO monitoring using indicator dilution methods is indicated. Calibrated and uncalibrated pulse wave analysis enable absolute or relative CO changes to be monitored in real-time during the assessment of fluid responsiveness. In patients undergoing open-heart and thoracic aortic surgery, transesophageal echocardiography is recommended. In selected cardiac surgery patients, advanced hemodynamic monitoring using thermodilution methods can be considered. In high-risk noncardiac surgical patients, invasive pulse wave analysis or esophageal Doppler should be used for perioperative hemodynamic management.
SUMMARY: Various invasive, minimally invasive, and noninvasive methods to assess CO are available. A profound understanding of the different CO monitoring methods is key to define indications for CO monitoring in the individual critically ill or surgical patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29621027     DOI: 10.1097/MCC.0000000000000492

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care        ISSN: 1070-5295            Impact factor:   3.687


  14 in total

1.  Cardiovascular dynamics during peroral endoscopic myotomy for esophageal achalasia: a prospective observational study using non-invasive finger cuff-derived pulse wave analysis.

Authors:  Bernd Saugel; Christina Vokuhl; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Thomas Rösch; Martin Petzoldt; Benjamin Löser
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 2.  Cardiorenal Interactions: A Review.

Authors:  Sanam Verma; Michelle M Graham; Ashani Lecamwasam; Adam Romanovsky; Shelley Duggan; Sean Bagshaw; Janek Manoj Senaratne
Journal:  CJC Open       Date:  2022-07-16

3.  Agreement between cardiac output estimation by multi-beat analysis of arterial blood pressure waveforms and continuous thermodilution in post cardiac surgery intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Ashish K Khanna; Lillian Nosow; Lauren Sands; Amit K Saha; Harshavardhan Agashe; Lynnette Harris; R Shayn Martin; Bryan Marchant
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2022-10-21       Impact factor: 1.977

4.  Comparison of two continuous non-invasive haemodynamic monitoring techniques in the perioperative setting.

Authors:  Jonė Jackevičiūtė; Greta Kraujalytė; Inna Jaremko; Vilija Stremaitytė; Jūratė Gudaitytė
Journal:  Acta Med Litu       Date:  2019

5.  Agreement between continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution for cardiac output measurement in perioperative and intensive care medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Karim Kouz; Frederic Michard; Alina Bergholz; Christina Vokuhl; Luisa Briesenick; Phillip Hoppe; Moritz Flick; Gerhard Schön; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  The end-expiratory occlusion test for detecting preload responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Francesco Gavelli; Rui Shi; Jean-Louis Teboul; Danila Azzolina; Xavier Monnet
Journal:  Ann Intensive Care       Date:  2020-05-24       Impact factor: 6.925

7.  Disagreement in cardiac output measurements between fourth-generation FloTrac and critical care ultrasonography in patients with circulatory shock: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Thomas Kaufmann; Ramon P Clement; Bart Hiemstra; Jaap Jan Vos; Thomas W L Scheeren; Frederik Keus; Iwan C C van der Horst
Journal:  J Intensive Care       Date:  2019-04-11

8.  Wireless, non-invasive, wearable device for continuous remote monitoring of hemodynamic parameters in a swine model of controlled hemorrhagic shock.

Authors:  Dean Nachman; Keren Constantini; Gal Poris; Linn Wagnert-Avraham; S David Gertz; Romi Littman; Eli Kabakov; Arik Eisenkraft; Yftach Gepner
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourth-generation of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients.

Authors:  Bodin Khwannimit; Rattina Jomsuriya
Journal:  Turk J Med Sci       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 0.973

10.  Perioperative non-invasive versus semi-invasive cardiac index monitoring in patients with bariatric surgery - a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Ulf Lorenzen; Markus Pohlmann; Jonathan Hansen; Phil Klose; Matthias Gruenewald; Jochen Renner; Gunnar Elke
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 2.217

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.