4.6 Article

Cardiac output measurement in children:: comparison of the Ultrasound Cardiac Output Monitor with thermodilution cardiac output measurement

Journal

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
Volume 34, Issue 6, Pages 1060-1064

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-008-1030-y

Keywords

cardiac output; pulmonary artery catheter; monitoring; hemodynamic; children; noninvasive

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare the assessment of cardiac output ( CO) in children using the noninvasive Ultrasound Cardiac Output Monitor ( USCOM) with the invasive pulmonary artery catheter ( PAC) thermodilution cardiac output measurement. Design and setting: Prospective observational study in a tertiary center for pediatric cardiology of a university children's hospital. Patients: Twenty-four pediatric patients with congenital heart disease without shunt undergoing cardiac catheterization under general anesthesia. Measurements and results: CO was measured by USCOM using a suprasternal CO Doppler probe in children undergoing cardiac catheterization. USCOM data were compared to CO simultaneously measured by PAC thermodilution technique. Measurements were repeated three times within 5 min in each patient. A mean percentage error not exceeding 30% was defined as indicating clinical useful reliability of the USCOM. CO values measured by PAC ranged from 1.3 to 5.3 l/ min ( median 3.6 l/ min). Bias and precision were -0.13 and 1.34 l/ min, respectively. The mean percentage error of CO measurement by the USCOM compared to PAC thermodilution technique was 36.4% for USCOM. Conclusions: Our preliminary data demonstrate that cardiac output measurement in children using the USCOM does not reliably represent absolute CO values as compared to PAC thermodilution. Further studies must evaluate the impact of incorporating effective aortic valve diameters on CO measurement using the USCOM.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available