Cardiac Output Assessed by the Fourth-Generation Arterial Waveform Analysis System Is Unreliable in Liver Transplant Recipients

2016 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 1170-1175 ◽  
Author(s):  
B.-F. Shih ◽  
P.-H. Huang ◽  
H.-P. Yu ◽  
F.-C. Liu ◽  
C.-C. Lin ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmitri Bystritski ◽  
Arieh Eden ◽  
Maria Shubinkin ◽  
David Hazzan ◽  
Arie Bitterman ◽  
...  

1997 ◽  
Vol 4 (12) ◽  
pp. 845
Author(s):  
Neville Glajchen ◽  
Michael D. Kaplan ◽  
Robert S. Shapiro ◽  
Patricia A. Sheiner

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Mehta ◽  
Ana Fernandez-Bustamante ◽  
Tamas Seres

Increasing evidence shows that goal-directed hemodynamic management can improve outcomes in surgical and intensive care settings. Arterial waveform analysis is one of the different techniques used for guiding goal-directed therapy. Multiple proprietary systems have developed algorithms for obtaining cardiac output from an arterial waveform, including the FloTrac, LiDCO, and PiCCO systems. These systems vary in terms of how they analyze the arterial pressure waveform as well as their requirements for invasive line placement and calibration. Although small-scale clinical trials using these monitors show promising data, large-scale multicenter trials are still needed to better determine how intraoperative goal-directed therapy with arterial waveform analysis can improve patient outcomes. This review provides a comparative analysis of the different arterial waveform monitors for intraoperative goal-directed therapy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document