BJA Advance Access originally published online on March 24, 2005
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005 94(6):748-755; doi:10.1093/bja/aei123
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Volumetric preload measurement by thermodilution: a comparison with transoesophageal echocardiography
1 Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine and 3 Division of Cardiac Surgery, Triemli City Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland. 2 Statistics, Department of Psychosocial Medicine University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
* Corresponding author: Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Triemli City Hospital, Birmensdorferstr. 497, 8063 Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail: christoph.hofer{at}triemli.stzh.ch
Background. End-diastolic volume indices determined by transpulmonary thermodilution and pulmonary artery thermodilution may give a better estimate of left ventricular preload than pulmonary capillary wedge pressure monitoring. The aim of this study was to compare volume preload monitoring using the two different thermodilution techniques with left ventricular preload assessment by transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE).
Methods. Twenty patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with preserved left–right ventricular function were studied after induction of anaesthesia. Conventional haemodynamic variables, global end-diastolic volume index using the pulse contour cardiac output (PiCCO) system (GEDVIPiCCO), continuous end-diastolic volume index (CEDVIPAC) measured by a modified pulmonary artery catheter (PAC), left ventricular end-diastolic area index (LVEDAI) using TOE and stroke volume indices (SVI) were recorded before and 20 and 40 min after fluid replacement therapy. Analysis of variance (Bonferroni–Dunn), Bland–Altman analysis and linear regression were performed.
Results. GEDVIPiCCO, CEDVIPAC, LVEDAI and SVIPiCCO/PAC increased significantly after fluid load (P<0.05). An increase >10% for GEDVIPiCCO and LVEDAI was observed in 85% and 90% of the patients compared with 45% for CEDVIPAC. Mean bias (2 SD) between percentage changes (
) in GEDVIPiCCO and LVEDAI was –3.2 (17.6)% and between CEDVIPAC and LVEDAI –8.7 (30.0)%. The correlation coefficient (r2) for GEDVIPiCCO vs LVEDAI was 0.658 and for CEDVIPAC vs LVEDAI 0.161. The relationship between GEDVIPiCCO and SVIPiCCO was stronger (r2=0.576) than that between CEDVIPAC and SVIPAC (r2=0.267).
Conclusion. GEDVI assessed by the PiCCO system gives a better reflection of echocardiographic changes in left ventricular preload, in response to fluid replacement therapy, than CEDVI measured by a modified PAC.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R.-M. B.G.E. Breukers, A.B. J. Groeneveld, R. B.P. de Wilde, and J. R.C. Jansen Transpulmonary versus continuous thermodilution cardiac output after valvular and coronary artery surgery Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, July 1, 2009; 9(1): 4 - 8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R.-M. B.G.E. Breukers, R. J. Trof, R. B.P. de Wilde, P. C.M. van den Berg, J. W.R. Twisk, J. R.C. Jansen, and J. Groeneveld Relative value of pressures and volumes in assessing fluid responsiveness after valvular and coronary artery surgery Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., January 1, 2009; 35(1): 62 - 68. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Gouvea, R. Diaz, L. Auler, and J. M. Martinho Evaluation of the right ventricular ejection fraction during orthotopic liver transplantation under propofol anaesthesia Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2008; 101(2): 161 - 165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|