Continuous cardiac index monitoring: A prospective observational study of agreement between a pulmonary artery catheter and a calibrated minimally invasive technique

Resuscitation ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 80 (8) ◽  
pp. 893-897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan V. McCoy ◽  
Steven M. Hollenberg ◽  
R. Phillip Dellinger ◽  
Ryan C. Arnold ◽  
Lynn Ruoss ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. B. W. Cox ◽  
A. M. den Ouden ◽  
M. Theunissen ◽  
L. J. Montenij ◽  
A. G. H. Kessels ◽  
...  

Introduction. Evaluation of accuracy, precision, and trending ability of cardiac index (CI) measurements using the Aesculon™ bioimpedance electrical cardiometry (Aesc) compared to the continuous pulmonary artery thermodilution catheter (PAC) technique before, during, and after cardiac surgery. Methods. A prospective observational study with fifty patients with ASA 3-4. At six time points (T), measurements of CI simultaneously by continuous cardiac output pulmonary thermodilution and thoracic bioimpedance and standard hemodynamics were performed. Analysis was performed using Bland-Altman, four-quadrant plot, and polar plot methodology. Results. CI obtained with pulmonary artery thermodilution and thoracic bioimpedance ranged from 1.00 to 6.75 L min−1 and 0.93 to 7.25 L min−1, respectively. Bland-Altman analysis showed a bias between CIBIO and CIPAC of 0.52 liters min−1 m−2, with LOA of [−2.2; 1.1] liters min−1 m−2. Percentage error between the two techniques was above 30% at every time point. Polar plot methodology and 4-quadrant analysis showed poor trending ability. Skin incision had no effect on the results. Conclusion. CI obtained by continuous PAC and CI obtained by Aesculon bioimpedance are not interchangeable in cardiac surgical patients. No effects of skin incision were found. International clinical trial registration number is ISRCTN26732484.


2021 ◽  
pp. 155335062098822
Author(s):  
Eirini Giovannopoulou ◽  
Anastasia Prodromidou ◽  
Nikolaos Blontzos ◽  
Christos Iavazzo

Objective. To review the existing studies on single-site robotic myomectomy and test the safety and feasibility of this innovative minimally invasive technique. Data Sources. PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar (from their inception to October 2019), as well as Clinicaltrials.gov databases up to April 2020. Methods of Study Selection. Clinical trials (prospective or retrospective) that reported the outcomes of single-site robotic myomectomy, with a sample of at least 20 patients were considered eligible for the review. Results. The present review was performed in accordance with the guidelines for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Four (4) studies met the inclusion criteria, and a total of 267 patients were included with a mean age from 37.1 to 39.1 years and BMI from 21.6 to 29.4 kg/m2. The mean operative time ranged from 131.4 to 154.2 min, the mean docking time from 5.1 to 5.45 min, and the mean blood loss from 57.9 to 182.62 ml. No intraoperative complications were observed, and a conversion rate of 3.8% was reported by a sole study. The overall postoperative complication rate was estimated at 2.2%, and the mean hospital stay ranged from 0.57 to 4.7 days. No significant differences were detected when single-site robotic myomectomy was compared to the multiport technique concerning operative time, blood loss, and total complication rate. Conclusion. Our findings support the safety of single-site robotic myomectomy and its equivalency with the multiport technique on the most studied outcomes. Further studies are needed to conclude on the optimal minimally invasive technique for myomectomy.


1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEPHENIE R. LONG ◽  
RALPH V. CLAYMAN ◽  
STEPHEN M. DIERKS ◽  
SHIMON MERETYK ◽  
TERRY BUELNA

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document