Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Automated echocardiography for measuring and tracking cardiac output after cardiac surgery: a validation study.
Juhl-Olsen, Peter; Smith, Søren H; Grejs, Anders M; Jørgensen, Martin R S; Bhavsar, Rajesh; Vistisen, Simon T.
Afiliação
  • Juhl-Olsen P; Department of Anaesthesiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. peter.juhl-olsen@clin.au.dk.
  • Smith SH; Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 82, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. peter.juhl-olsen@clin.au.dk.
  • Grejs AM; Department of Anaesthesiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Jørgensen MRS; Department of Intensive Care, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Bhavsar R; Department of Anaesthesiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Vistisen ST; Department of Anaesthesiology & Intensive Care, Hospital of Southern Jutland, Kresten Philipsens Vej 15, 6200, Aabenraa, Denmark.
J Clin Monit Comput ; 34(5): 913-922, 2020 Oct.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31677135
ABSTRACT
Echocardiographic measurement of cardiac output with automated software analyses of spectral curves in the left ventricular outflow tract has been introduced. This study aimed to assess the precision and accuracy of cardiac output measurements as well as the ability to track cardiac output changes over time comparing the automated echocardiographic method with the continuous pulmonary artery thermodilution cardiac output technique and the manual echocardiographic method in cardiac surgery patients. Cardiac output was measured simultaneously with all three methods in 50 patients on the morning after cardiac surgery. A second comparison was performed 90-180 min later. Precisions for each method were measured. Bias and limits of agreement (LoA) between methods were assessed and concordance- and polar plots were used for evaluating trending of cardiac output. When comparing the automated echocardiographic method with the thermodilution technique, the mean bias was 0.72 L/min with LoA - 1.89; 3.33 L/min corresponding to a percentage error of 46%. The concordance rate was 47%. The mean bias between the automated- and the manual echocardiographic methods was - 0.06 L/min (95% LoA - 2.33; 2.21 L/min, percentage error 42%). The concordance rate was 79%. The automated echocardiographic method did not meet the criteria for interchangeability with the thermodilution technique or the manual echocardiographic method. Trending ability was poor when compared to the continuous thermodilution technique, but moderate when compared to the manual echocardiographic method.Trial registry number NCT03372863. Retrospectively registered December 14th 2017.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article