Pulse Wave Analysis to Estimate Cardiac Output: Comment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Hughey ◽  
Jacob Cole ◽  
Gregory Booth
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Wave Analysis

scholarly journals Pulse Wave Analysis to Estimate Cardiac Output

2020 ◽  
Vol 134 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim Kouz ◽  
Thomas W. L. Scheeren ◽  
Daniel de Backer ◽  
Bernd Saugel
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Wave Analysis ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
Time Pulse

Pulse wave analysis enables cardiac output to be estimated continuously and in real time. Pulse wave analysis methods can be classified into invasive, minimally invasive, and noninvasive and into externally calibrated, internally calibrated, and uncalibrated methods.

scholarly journals Cardiac output estimation using pulse wave analysis—physiology, algorithms, and technologies: a narrative review

2021 ◽  
Vol 126 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-76
Author(s):  
Bernd Saugel ◽  
Karim Kouz ◽  
Thomas W.L. Scheeren ◽  
Gillis Greiwe ◽  
Phillip Hoppe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Wave Analysis

Determination of cardiac output in anesthetized neonatal foals by use of two pulse wave analysis methods

2009 ◽  
Vol 70 (3) ◽  
pp. 334-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre C. Shih ◽  
Steeve Giguère ◽  
Linda C. Sanchez ◽  
Alexander Valverde ◽  
Hope J. Jankunas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Wave Analysis ◽  
Analysis Methods

Finapres arterial pulse wave analysis with Modelflow® is not a reliable non-invasive method for assessment of cardiac output

2002 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaap J. REMMEN ◽  
Wim R.M. AENGEVAEREN ◽  
Freek W.A. VERHEUGT ◽  
Tjeerd VAN DER WERF ◽  
Hans E. LUIJTEN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Elderly Subjects ◽  
Arterial Pulse ◽  
Wave Analysis ◽  
Thermodilution Cardiac Output ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Arterial Pulse Wave ◽  
Invasive Method

Non-invasive continuous monitoring of cardiac output could be very useful in clinical care and in research settings, particularly in elderly subjects. We studied whether Finapres arterial pulse wave analysis with Modelflow® is a reliable non-invasive method for the assessment of cardiac output in healthy elderly subjects. We compared Modelflow® cardiac output (MFCO) with thermodilution cardiac output (TDCO) in 28 healthy subjects, aged 70±4years (mean±S.D.). TDCO was measured during right-sided heart catheterization, while MFCO was calculated with Modelflow® software from non-invasive arterial Finapres blood pressure, which was measured simultaneously. The two methods were compared using a paired t-test, by Pearson correlation, and by Bland–Altman analysis. TDCO was 6.4±1.1litres/min (mean±S.D.) and MFCO was 4.7±1.3litres/min (P<0.001). There was no significant correlation between MFCO and TDCO (r = 0.28, P = 0.13). Mean difference (bias) was -1.7litres/min (S.E.M. 0.27litres/min), with an S.D. (precision) of 1.5litres/min. The 95% limits of agreement were -4.6 to +1.1litres/min. In conclusion, non-invasive MFCO values differed significantly from and showed no significant correlation with invasively determined TDCO values in the normal range. Although simple, non-invasive and patient-friendly, the Modelflow® method is inaccurate for assessment of cardiac output without invasive calibration.

Arterial pulse wave analysis: An accurate means of determining cardiac output in children*

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 532-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Kim ◽  
W Jeffrey Dreyer ◽  
Anthony C. Chang ◽  
John P. Breinholt ◽  
Ronald G. Grifka
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Arterial Pulse ◽  
Wave Analysis ◽  
Arterial Pulse Wave

Finapres arterial pulse wave analysis with Modelflow is not a reliable non-invasive method for assessment of cardiac output

2002 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaap J. REMMEN ◽  
Wim R. M. AENGEVAEREN ◽  
Freek W. A. VERHEUGT ◽  
Tjeerd van der WERF ◽  
Hans E. LUIJTEN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Arterial Pulse ◽  
Wave Analysis ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Arterial Pulse Wave ◽  
Invasive Method

scholarly journals Non-invasive Oscillometry-Based Estimation of Cardiac Output – Can We Use It in Clinical Practice?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Reshetnik ◽  
Jonida Gjolli ◽  
Markus van der Giet ◽  
Friederike Compton
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Pulse Wave ◽  
Estimation Method ◽  
Fluid Challenge ◽  
Pulse Wave Analysis ◽  
Wave Analysis ◽  
Non Invasive

While invasive thermodilution techniques remain the reference methods for cardiac output (CO) measurement, there is a currently unmet need for non-invasive techniques to simplify CO determination, reduce complications related to invasive procedures required for indicator dilution CO measurement, and expand the application field toward emergency room, non-intensive care, or outpatient settings. We evaluated the performance of a non-invasive oscillometry-based CO estimation method compared to transpulmonary thermodilution. To assess agreement between the devices, we used Bland–Altman analysis. Four-quadrant plot analysis was used to visualize the ability of Mobil-O-Graph (MG) to track CO changes after a fluid challenge. Trending analysis of CO trajectories was used to compare MG and PiCCO® calibrated pulse wave analysis over time (6 h). We included 40 patients from the medical intensive care unit at the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin between November 2019 and June 2020. The median age was 73 years. Forty percent of the study population was male; 98% was ventilator-dependent and 75% vasopressor-dependent at study entry. The mean of the observed differences for the cardiac output index (COI) was 0.7 l∗min–1*m–2 and the lower, and upper 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were -1.9 and 3.3 l∗min–1*m–2, respectively. The 95% confidence interval for the LOA was ± 0.26 l∗min–1*m–2, the percentage error 83.6%. We observed concordant changes in CO with MG and PiCCO® in 50% of the measurements after a fluid challenge and over the course of 6 h. Cardiac output calculation with a novel oscillometry-based pulse wave analysis method is feasible and replicable in critically ill patients. However, we did not find clinically applicable agreement between MG and thermodilution or calibrated pulse wave analysis, respectively, assessed with established evaluation routine using the Bland–Altman approach and with trending analysis methods. In summary, we do not recommend the use of this method in critically ill patients at this time. As the basic approach is promising and the CO determination with MG very simple to perform, further studies should be undertaken both in hemodynamically stable patients, and in the critical care setting to allow additional adjustments of the underlying algorithm for CO estimation with MG.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document