Department of Anesthesiology, Section on Critical Care Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Outcomes Research Consortium, Cleveland, OH, USA.
J Clin Monit Comput. 2023 Apr;37(2):559-565. doi: 10.1007/s10877-022-00924-z. Epub 2022 Oct 21.
We sought to assess agreement of cardiac output estimation between continuous pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) guided thermodilution (CO-CTD) and a novel pulse wave analysis (PWA) method that performs an analysis of multiple beats of the arterial blood pressure waveform (CO-MBA) in post-operative cardiac surgery patients. PAC obtained CO-CTD measurements were compared with CO-MBA measurements from the Argos monitor (Retia Medical; Valhalla, NY, USA), in prospectively enrolled adult cardiac surgical intensive care unit patients. Agreement was assessed via Bland-Altman analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed on data segments identified as arrhythmia, or with low CO (less than 5 L/min). 927 hours of monitoring data from 79 patients was analyzed, of which 26 had arrhythmia. Mean CO-CTD was 5.29 ± 1.14 L/min (bias ± precision), whereas mean CO-MBA was 5.36 ± 1.33 L/min, (4.95 ± 0.80 L/min and 5.04 ± 1.07 L/min in the arrhythmia subgroup). Mean of differences was 0.04 ± 1.04 L/min with an error of 38.2%. In the arrhythmia subgroup, mean of differences was 0.14 ± 0.90 L/min with an error of 35.4%. In the low CO subgroup, mean of differences was 0.26 ± 0.89 L/min with an error of 40.4%. In adult patients after cardiac surgery, including those with low cardiac output and arrhythmia CO-MBA is not interchangeable with the continuous thermodilution method via a PAC, when using a 30% error threshold.
我们旨在评估连续肺动脉导管(PAC)引导的热稀释法(CO-CTD)和新型脉搏波分析(PWA)方法在心脏手术后患者中估计心输出量的一致性,该方法对动脉血压波形的多个搏动进行分析(CO-MBA)。将 PAC 获得的 CO-CTD 测量值与 Argos 监测仪(Retia Medical;Valhalla,NY,USA)的 CO-MBA 测量值进行比较,该监测仪在前瞻性纳入的成年心脏手术重症监护病房患者中使用。通过 Bland-Altman 分析评估一致性。对被确定为心律失常或心输出量低(低于 5 L/min)的数据段进行亚组分析。对 79 例患者的 927 小时监测数据进行了分析,其中 26 例存在心律失常。CO-CTD 的平均值为 5.29 ± 1.14 L/min(偏倚±精度),而 CO-MBA 的平均值为 5.36 ± 1.33 L/min(心律失常亚组为 4.95 ± 0.80 L/min 和 5.04 ± 1.07 L/min)。差异平均值为 0.04 ± 1.04 L/min,误差为 38.2%。在心律失常亚组中,差异平均值为 0.14 ± 0.90 L/min,误差为 35.4%。在心输出量低亚组中,差异平均值为 0.26 ± 0.89 L/min,误差为 40.4%。在心脏手术后的成年患者中,包括那些存在低心输出量和心律失常的患者,当使用 30%的误差阈值时,CO-MBA 与连续热稀释法通过 PAC 不可互换。