Noninvasive Cardiac Output Determination Using Applanation Tonometry-Derived Radial Artery Pulse Contour Analysis in Critically Ill Patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 2009 ◽  
pp. 81-82
Author(s):  
T. Dorman
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Radial Artery ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Pulse Contour Analysis ◽  
Pulse Contour ◽  
Applanation Tonometry ◽  
Contour Analysis ◽  
Noninvasive Cardiac Output ◽  
Cardiac Output Determination

scholarly journals Nexfin Noninvasive Continuous Hemodynamic Monitoring: Validation against Continuous Pulse Contour and Intermittent Transpulmonary Thermodilution Derived Cardiac Output in Critically Ill Patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koen Ameloot ◽  
Katrijn Van De Vijver ◽  
Ole Broch ◽  
Niels Van Regenmortel ◽  
Inneke De laet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Pulse Contour Analysis ◽  
Pulse Contour ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Medical Systems ◽  
Contour Analysis ◽  
Limits Of Agreement ◽  
Polar Plot

Introduction. Nexfin (Bmeye, Amsterdam, Netherlands) is a noninvasive cardiac output (CO) monitor based on finger arterial pulse contour analysis. The aim of this study was to validate Nexfin CO (NexCO) against thermodilution (TDCO) and pulse contour CO (CCO) by PiCCO (Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany).Patients and Methods. In a mix of critically ill patients (n=45), NexCO and CCO were measured continuously and recorded at 2-hour intervals during the 8-hour study period. TDCO was measured at 0–4–8 hrs.Results. NexCO showed a moderate to good (significant) correlation with TDCO (R20.68,P<0.001) and CCO (R20.71,P<0.001). Bland and Altman analysis comparing NexCO with TDCO revealed a bias (± limits of agreement, LA) of 0.4 ± 2.32 L/min (with 36% error) while analysis comparing NexCO with CCO showed a bias (±LA) of 0.2 ± 2.32 L/min (37% error). NexCO is able to follow changes in TDCO and CCO during the same time interval (level of concordance 89.3% and 81%). Finally, polar plot analysis showed that trending capabilities were acceptable when changes in NexCO (ΔNexCO) were compared toΔTDCO andΔCCO (resp., 89% and 88.9% of changes were within the level of 10% limits of agreement).Conclusion. we found a moderate to good correlation between CO measurements obtained with Nexfin and PiCCO.

Interpretation of Noninvasive and Invasive Information

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Borzoo Farhang ◽  
Erik P Anderson ◽  
Mark P Hamlin
Keyword(s):  
Critically Ill ◽  
Hemodynamic Monitoring ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Pulse Contour Analysis ◽  
Pulse Contour ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Contour Analysis ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Arterial Blood ◽  
Pulmonary Arterial

Traditional, static measures of resuscitation, such as vital signs, central venous pressure, and pulmonary arterial pressure, provide momentary glimpses evolving hemodynamic states. In patients with shock, these measures of resuscitation are poor indicators of response to therapy. As a result, dynamic assessments of cardiovascular status are now used in critically ill patients to facilitate resuscitation. Some of these approaches focus on fluid responsiveness. These assessments allow care to be tailored to each patient’s response to interventions. An evolving aspect of hemodynamic monitoring is evaluation of the adequacy of tissue perfusion and oxygen delivery. In this review, we consider the use of arterial, central venous, and pulmonary arterial blood pressure monitoring; echocardiography; transesophageal Doppler technology; pulse contour analysis; bioimpedance and bioreactance; and partial rebreathing monitoring modalities to assess hemodynamic status in critically ill patients.  This review contains 22 figures, 5 tables, and 38 references. Key words: echocardiography, esophageal Doppler technology, invasive and noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring, pulse contour analysis, shock 

Reliability of continuous cardiac output determination by pulse-contour analysis in porcine septic shock

2006 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Schuerholz ◽  
M. Cobas Meyer ◽  
L. Friedrich ◽  
M. Przemeck ◽  
R. Sumpelmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Septic Shock ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Contour Analysis ◽  
Pulse Contour ◽  
Continuous Cardiac Output ◽  
Contour Analysis ◽  
Cardiac Output Determination

scholarly journals Noninvasive cardiac output measurement in orthostasis: pulse contour analysis compared with acetylene rebreathing

1999 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. 2266-2273 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Stok ◽  
R. C. O. Stringer ◽  
J. M. Karemaker
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Reference Method ◽  
Pulse Contour Analysis ◽  
Pulse Contour ◽  
Upright Posture ◽  
Transmission Line Model ◽  
Contour Analysis ◽  
Output Measurement ◽  
Noninvasive Cardiac Output ◽  
Head Up Tilt

We tested the reliability of noninvasive cardiac output (CO) measurement in different body positions by pulse contour analysis (COpc) by using a transmission line model (K. H. Wesseling, B. De Wit, J. A. P. Weber, and N. T. Smith. Adv. Cardiol. Phys.5, Suppl. II: 16–52, 1983). Acetylene rebreathing (COrebr) was used as a reference method. Twelve subjects (age 21–34 yr) were studied: 1) six in whom COrebr and COpc were measured in the standing and 6° head-down tilt (HDT) postures and 2) six in whom CO was measured in the 30° HDT, supine, 30° head up-tilt (HUT), and 70° HUT postures on a tilt table. The COrebr-to-COpcratio in (near) the supine position during rebreathing was used as the calibration factor for COpcmeasurements. Calibrated COpc(COcal sup) consistently overestimated CO in the upright posture. The drop in CO with upright posture was underestimated by ∼50%. COcal sup and COrebr values did not differ in the 30° HDT position. Changes in the COrebr-to-COpcratio are highly variable among subjects in response to a change in posture. Therefore, COpc must be recalibrated for each subject in each posture.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document