Institute of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Triemli City Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2010 Apr;24(2):257-64. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2009.06.003. Epub 2009 Aug 22.
Arterial pressure waveform analysis is a less invasive alternative to the pulmonary artery catheter for continuous cardiac output (CO) measurement. Uncalibrated and calibrated systems are actually available (ie, the FloTrac/Vigileo system [Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA] and the PiCCOplus system [Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany]). According to the FloTrac/Vigileo manufacturer, reliable measurements can be performed using any existing arterial catheter. The aim of this study was to evaluate CO determined by the FloTrac/Vigileo system using a radial (FCO(radial)) and femoral arterial catheter (FCO(femoral)) as well as the PiCCOplus system (PCO). Intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution (ICO) was used as primary reference technique.
A prospective clinical study.
A teaching hospital, single center.
Twenty-six cardiac surgery patients.
Perioperative CO measurements.
CO was assessed at predefined measurement points. FCO(radial), FCO(femoral), and PCO were recorded after the induction of anesthesia, after sternotomy, at skin closure, after intensive care unit transfer, and during intensive care unit stay 12 and 24 hours after study initiation. ICO was determined as the mean of 3 bolus injections. Bland-Altman analysis revealed comparable mean bias and limits of agreement for FCO(radial), FCO(femoral), and PCO when compared with ICO. There was a decreased agreement for all devices in the postoperative period. However, a consistently close agreement was observed for the direct comparison between FCO(radial) and FCO(femoral).
Performance of the FloTrac/Vigileo system via radial as well as femoral access and the PiCCOplus monitoring for cardiac output measurement were comparable when tested against intermittent thermodilution in cardiac surgery patients.
动脉压力波形分析是一种替代肺动脉导管进行连续心输出量(CO)测量的有创方法。目前有未经校准和校准的系统(即 FloTrac/Vigileo 系统[爱德华兹生命科学公司,欧文,加利福尼亚州]和 PiCCOplus 系统[脉冲医疗系统公司,慕尼黑,德国])。根据 FloTrac/Vigileo 制造商的说法,使用任何现有的动脉导管都可以进行可靠的测量。本研究旨在评估使用桡动脉(FCO(桡动脉))和股动脉导管(FCO(股动脉))的 FloTrac/Vigileo 系统以及 PiCCOplus 系统(PCO)确定的 CO。间歇性肺动脉热稀释(ICO)被用作主要参考技术。
前瞻性临床研究。
教学医院,单中心。
26 例心脏手术患者。
围手术期 CO 测量。
在预定的测量点评估 CO。在麻醉诱导后、胸骨切开后、皮肤闭合时、重症监护病房转移后以及在研究开始后 12 小时和 24 小时的重症监护病房停留期间记录 FCO(桡动脉)、FCO(股动脉)和 PCO。ICO 是通过 3 次推注确定的平均值。Bland-Altman 分析显示,与 ICO 相比,FCO(桡动脉)、FCO(股动脉)和 PCO 的平均偏差和一致性界限具有可比性。在术后期间,所有设备的一致性都降低了。然而,在桡动脉 FCO(桡动脉)和股动脉 FCO(股动脉)之间的直接比较中,观察到了一致的密切一致性。
在心脏手术患者中,与间歇性热稀释法相比,通过桡动脉和股动脉通路以及 PiCCOplus 监测进行 FloTrac/Vigileo 系统的性能在测量心输出量时是可比的。