4.6 Article

Comparison of two methods for enhanced continuous circulatory monitoring in patients with septic shock

Journal

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
Volume 33, Issue 10, Pages 1805-1810

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-007-0703-2

Keywords

cardiac output; central venous pressure; continuous monitoring; global end-diastolic volume; pulmonary artery occlusion pressure; right ventricular end-diastolic volume; septic shock

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare a modified pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) and pulse-contour analysis by the PiCCO (Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany) system for continuous assessment of cardiac output in patients with septic shock. In addition, to assess the relationships between an index of global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) derived by the PiCCO system with traditional PAC-derived indicators of filling: central venous pressure; pulmonary artery occlusion pressure; and right ventricular end- diastolic volume (RVEDV). Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Surgical intensive care unit of a university hospital. Patients and participants: 14 patients with septic shock. Interventions: None. Measurements and results: A significant correlation was found between continuous cardiac output by PAC ( CCOPAC) and by pulse-contour analysis (r(2) = 0.714, p < 0.0001), accompanied by a bias of 0.11 min(-1) and a precision of 2.71 min(-1). The correlation between CCOPAC and cardiac output measured by transcardiopulmonary thermodilution was also significant (r(2) = 0.781, < 0.0001). There was a bias for the two methods of 0.21 min(-1), and a precision of 2.21 min(-1). The GEDV showed no correlation with central venous pressure, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, or RVEDV. Conclusion: In patients with septic shock, the averaged bias in continuous measurement of cardiac output by both a modified pulmonary artery catheter and pulse- contour analysis was small, but variability was large. No correlation was found between GEDV and RVEDV. The clinical importance of different cardiac filling parameters needs further investigation.

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