Journal of critical care · 2015
Accuracy of Vigileo/Flotrac monitoring system in morbidly obese patients.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tejedor Ana, Rivas Eva, Ríos Jose, Arismendi Ebymar, Martinez-Palli Graciela, Delgado Salvadora, Balust Jaume
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Our goal was to assess the accuracy of measuring cardiac output (CO) by the FloTrac/Vigileo (CO(V)) device in comparison with thermodilution technique through pulmonary artery catheterization (PAC(TD)) in morbidly obese patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cardiac output in 8 morbidly obese patients was assessed twice at upright and lying position breathing ambient air. At least 4 consecutive CO measurements with 10 mL of ice-cold saline injections were performed each time. Simultaneous CO measurements were recorded with both single-bolus thermodilution and CO(V).
RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two CO data pairs were collected. The overall mean single-bolus thermodilution 6.2 ± 1.1 L/min was lower than the overall mean CO(V) 7.8 ± 1.6 L/min (P < .001). Lin concordance coefficient indicated that overall agreement between PAC(TD) and CO(V) was poor, 0.29. Lin concordance coefficient in sitting position was 0.29, 95% confidence interval (0.17-0.40) and in lying position was 0.30, 95% confidence interval (0.15-0.44). The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed systematically higher values from CO(V) in comparison with PAC(TD). These differences increased in presence of high CO measurements. In 3 of 8 patients, the percentage error was lower than 20%, whereas in the other 5, it was higher than 20%. Of these 5, in 2 cases, the percentage error was greater than 50%.
CONCLUSION: Data obtained using CO(V) vs PAC(TD) measurements showed poor correlation. The results were not interchangeable.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cardiac output in 8 morbidly obese patients was assessed twice at upright and lying position breathing ambient air. At least 4 consecutive CO measurements with 10 mL of ice-cold saline injections were performed each time. Simultaneous CO measurements were recorded with both single-bolus thermodilution and CO(V).
RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two CO data pairs were collected. The overall mean single-bolus thermodilution 6.2 ± 1.1 L/min was lower than the overall mean CO(V) 7.8 ± 1.6 L/min (P < .001). Lin concordance coefficient indicated that overall agreement between PAC(TD) and CO(V) was poor, 0.29. Lin concordance coefficient in sitting position was 0.29, 95% confidence interval (0.17-0.40) and in lying position was 0.30, 95% confidence interval (0.15-0.44). The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed systematically higher values from CO(V) in comparison with PAC(TD). These differences increased in presence of high CO measurements. In 3 of 8 patients, the percentage error was lower than 20%, whereas in the other 5, it was higher than 20%. Of these 5, in 2 cases, the percentage error was greater than 50%.
CONCLUSION: Data obtained using CO(V) vs PAC(TD) measurements showed poor correlation. The results were not interchangeable.