危重病人心输出量的连续评估:一种基于脉搏波传递时间与经肺热调节的无创方法。

IF 1.8 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Research and Practice Pub Date : 2020-07-20 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2020/8956372
Ulrike Ehlers, Rolf Erlebach, Giovanna Brandi, Federica Stretti, Richard Valek, Stephanie Klinzing, Reto Schuepbach
{"title":"危重病人心输出量的连续评估:一种基于脉搏波传递时间与经肺热调节的无创方法。","authors":"Ulrike Ehlers,&nbsp;Rolf Erlebach,&nbsp;Giovanna Brandi,&nbsp;Federica Stretti,&nbsp;Richard Valek,&nbsp;Stephanie Klinzing,&nbsp;Reto Schuepbach","doi":"10.1155/2020/8956372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Estimation of cardiac output (CO) and evaluation of change in CO as a result of therapeutic interventions are essential in critical care medicine. Whether noninvasive tools estimating CO, such as continuous cardiac output (esCCOTM) methods, are sufficiently accurate and precise to guide therapy needs further evaluation. We compared esCCOTM with an established method, namely, transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). <i>Patients and Methods</i>. In a single center mixed ICU, esCCOTM was compared with the TPTD method in 38 patients. The primary endpoint was accuracy and precision. The cardiac output was assessed by two investigators at baseline and after eight hours.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 38 critically ill patients, the two methods correlated significantly (<i>r</i> = 0.742). The Bland-Altman analysis showed a bias of 1.6 l/min with limits of agreement of -1.76 l/min and +4.98 l/min. The percentage error for CO<sub>esCCO</sub> was 47%. The correlation of trends in cardiac output after eight hours was significant (<i>r</i> = 0.442), with a concordance of 74%. The performance of CO<sub>esCCO</sub> could not be linked to the patient's condition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The accuracy and precision of the esCCOTM method were not clinically acceptable for our critical patients. EsCCOTM also failed to reliably detect changes in cardiac output.</p>","PeriodicalId":46583,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Research and Practice","volume":"2020 ","pages":"8956372"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/8956372","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Continuous Estimation of Cardiac Output in Critical Care: A Noninvasive Method Based on Pulse Wave Transit Time Compared with Transpulmonary Thermodilution.\",\"authors\":\"Ulrike Ehlers,&nbsp;Rolf Erlebach,&nbsp;Giovanna Brandi,&nbsp;Federica Stretti,&nbsp;Richard Valek,&nbsp;Stephanie Klinzing,&nbsp;Reto Schuepbach\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2020/8956372\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Estimation of cardiac output (CO) and evaluation of change in CO as a result of therapeutic interventions are essential in critical care medicine. Whether noninvasive tools estimating CO, such as continuous cardiac output (esCCOTM) methods, are sufficiently accurate and precise to guide therapy needs further evaluation. We compared esCCOTM with an established method, namely, transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). <i>Patients and Methods</i>. In a single center mixed ICU, esCCOTM was compared with the TPTD method in 38 patients. The primary endpoint was accuracy and precision. The cardiac output was assessed by two investigators at baseline and after eight hours.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 38 critically ill patients, the two methods correlated significantly (<i>r</i> = 0.742). The Bland-Altman analysis showed a bias of 1.6 l/min with limits of agreement of -1.76 l/min and +4.98 l/min. The percentage error for CO<sub>esCCO</sub> was 47%. The correlation of trends in cardiac output after eight hours was significant (<i>r</i> = 0.442), with a concordance of 74%. The performance of CO<sub>esCCO</sub> could not be linked to the patient's condition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The accuracy and precision of the esCCOTM method were not clinically acceptable for our critical patients. EsCCOTM also failed to reliably detect changes in cardiac output.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46583,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care Research and Practice\",\"volume\":\"2020 \",\"pages\":\"8956372\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/8956372\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8956372\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8956372","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:评估心输出量(CO)和评估治疗干预导致的CO变化在重症监护医学中是必不可少的。评估CO的无创工具,如持续心输出量(escotm)方法是否足够准确和精确,以指导治疗,需要进一步评估。我们将escotm与一种已建立的方法,即经肺热调节(TPTD)进行比较。患者和方法。在单中心混合ICU中,对38例患者进行escotm与TPTD方法的比较。主要终点是准确性和精密度。心输出量由两名研究者在基线和8小时后进行评估。结果:38例危重患者中,两种方法相关性显著(r = 0.742)。Bland-Altman分析显示偏差为1.6 l/min,一致性限为-1.76 l/min和+4.98 l/min。COesCCO的误差百分比为47%。8小时后心输出量趋势相关性显著(r = 0.442),一致性为74%。COesCCO的表现不能与患者的病情联系起来。结论:esCCOTM方法的准确性和精密度在临床上不能被危重患者接受。escctm也不能可靠地检测心输出量的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Continuous Estimation of Cardiac Output in Critical Care: A Noninvasive Method Based on Pulse Wave Transit Time Compared with Transpulmonary Thermodilution.

Purpose: Estimation of cardiac output (CO) and evaluation of change in CO as a result of therapeutic interventions are essential in critical care medicine. Whether noninvasive tools estimating CO, such as continuous cardiac output (esCCOTM) methods, are sufficiently accurate and precise to guide therapy needs further evaluation. We compared esCCOTM with an established method, namely, transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). Patients and Methods. In a single center mixed ICU, esCCOTM was compared with the TPTD method in 38 patients. The primary endpoint was accuracy and precision. The cardiac output was assessed by two investigators at baseline and after eight hours.

Results: In 38 critically ill patients, the two methods correlated significantly (r = 0.742). The Bland-Altman analysis showed a bias of 1.6 l/min with limits of agreement of -1.76 l/min and +4.98 l/min. The percentage error for COesCCO was 47%. The correlation of trends in cardiac output after eight hours was significant (r = 0.442), with a concordance of 74%. The performance of COesCCO could not be linked to the patient's condition.

Conclusion: The accuracy and precision of the esCCOTM method were not clinically acceptable for our critical patients. EsCCOTM also failed to reliably detect changes in cardiac output.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care Research and Practice
Critical Care Research and Practice CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Hemodynamic Management and Postoperative Outcomes After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Prospective Observational Study. Efficacy of COVID-19 Treatments in Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Assessment of Satisfaction Levels Among Families of Intensive Care Unit Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Serum Concentration at 24 h With Intensive Beta-Lactam Therapy in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Prospective Study: Beta-Lactam Blood Levels in Sepsis. Assessing the Impact of Simulation-Based Learning on Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Critical Care Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1