4.6 Review

Continuous and less invasive central hemodynamic monitoring by blood pressure waveform analysis

Journal

Publisher

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpheart.00303.2010

Keywords

arterial tree; cardiac output; intensive care unit; modeling; signal processing

Funding

  1. Michigan State University
  2. American Heart Association
  3. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [HL-080568]
  4. National Science Foundation [0643477]
  5. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [R21HL080568] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mukkamala R, Xu D. Continuous and less invasive central hemodynamic monitoring by blood pressure waveform analysis. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 299: H584-H599, 2010. First published July 9, 2010; doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00303.2010.-Blood pressure waveform analysis may permit continuous (i.e., automated) and less invasive (i.e., safer and simpler) central hemodynamic monitoring in the intensive care unit and other clinical settings without requiring any instrumentation beyond what is already in use or available. This practical approach has been a topic of intense investigation for decades and may garner even more interest henceforth due to the evolving demographics as well as recent trends in clinical hemodynamic monitoring. Here, we review techniques that have appeared in the literature for mathematically estimating clinically significant central hemodynamic variables, such as cardiac output, from different blood pressure waveforms. We begin by providing the rationale for pursuing such techniques. We then summarize earlier techniques and thereafter overview recent techniques by our collaborators and us in greater depth while pinpointing both their strengths and weaknesses. We conclude with suggestions for future research directions in the field and a description of some potential clinical applications of the techniques.

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