BJA Advance Access originally published online on July 8, 2005
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005 95(3):326-331; doi:10.1093/bja/aei189
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less invasive determination of cardiac output from the arterial pressure by aortic diameter-calibrated pulse contour
1 Department of Intensive Care H4Q, Leiden University Medical Centre, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands. 2 Department of Cardiac Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Via Olgetta 60, I-20132 Milan, Italy
* Corresponding author. E-mail: j.r.c.jansen{at}lumc.nl
Background. Cardiac output by modelflow pulse contour method can be monitored quantitatively and continuously only after an initial calibration, to adapt the model to an individual patient. The modelflow method computes beat-to-beat cardiac output (COmf) from the radial artery pressure, by simulating a three-element model of aortic impedance with post-mortem data from human aortas.
Methods. In our improved version of modelflow (COmfc) we adapted this model to a real time measure of the aortic cross-sectional area (CSA) of the descending aorta just above the diaphragm, measured by a new transoesophageal echo device (HemoSonic 100). COmf and COmfc were compared with thermodilution cardiac output (COtd) in 24 patients in the intensive care unit. Each thermodilution value was the mean of four measurements equally spread over the ventilatory cycle.
Results. Least squares regression of COtd vs COmf gave y=1.09x[95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96–1.22], R2=0.15, and of COtd vs COmfc resulted in y=1.02x(95% CI 0.96–1.08), R2=0.69. The limits of agreement of the un-calibrated COmf were –3.53 to 2.79, bias=0.37 litre min–1 and of the diameter-calibrated method COmfc, –1.48 to 1.32, bias=–0.08 litre min–1. The coefficient of variation for the difference between methods decreased from 28 (un-calibrated) to 12% after diameter-calibration.
Conclusions. After diameter-calibration, the improved modelflow pulse contour method reliably estimates cardiac output without the need of a calibration with thermodilution, leading to a less invasive cardiac output monitoring method.
Declaration of interest. ARROW Int. provided the equipment for this study. One of the authors (J.S.) is a consultant to this company.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Mayer, J. Boldt, M. W. Wolf, J. Lang, and S. Suttner Cardiac Output Derived from Arterial Pressure Waveform Analysis in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: Validity of a Second Generation Device Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2008; 106(3): 867 - 872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Ercole Commentary: Attenuation in invasive blood pressure measurement systems Br. J. Anaesth., May 1, 2006; 96(5): 560 - 562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|