Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients

Bodin KHWANNIMIT, (Prince of Songkla University, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand)
Rattina JOMSURIYA (Prince of Songkla University, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand)
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences
5 1
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 50 Sayı: 4 Sayfa Aralığı: 860 - 869 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.3906/sag-1909-58 İndeks Tarihi: 28-08-2020

Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients

Öz:
Background/aim: FloTrac/Vigileo is a noncalibrated arterial pressure waveform analysis for cardiac index (CI) monitoring. The aim ofour study was to compare the CI measured by the 4th generation of FloTrac with PiCCO in septic shock patients.Materials and methods: We simultaneously measured the CI using FloTrac (CIv) and compared it with the CI derived fromtranspulmonary thermodilution (CItd) as well as the pulse contour-derived CI using PiCCO (CIp).Results: Thirty-one septic shock patients were included. The CIv correlated with CItd (r = 0.62, P < 0.0001). The Bland-Altman analysisshowed a bias of 0.14, and the limits of agreement were –1.62–1.91 L/min/m2 with a percentage error of 47.4%. However, the concordancerate between CIv and CItd was 93.6%. The comparison of CIv with CIp (n = 352 paired measurements) revealed a bias of -0.16, and thelimits of agreement were –1.45–1.79 L/min/m2 with a percentage error of 44.8%. The overall correlation coefficient between CIv and CIpwas 0.63 (P < 0.0001), and the concordance rate was 85.4%.Conclusion: The 4th generation of FloTrac has not acceptable agreement to assess CI; however, it has the ability to tracked changes ofCI, when compared with the transpulmonary thermodilution method by PiCCO.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. Saugel B, Vincent JL. Cardiac output monitoring: how to choose the optimal method for the individual patient. Current Opinion in Critical Care 2018; 24 (3): 165-172. doi: 10.1097/ Mcc.0000000000000492
  • 2. Harvey S, Harrison DA, Singer M, Ashcroft J, Jones CM et al. Assessment of the clinical effectiveness of pulmonary artery catheters in management of patients in intensive care (PACMan): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005; 366 (9484): 472-477.
  • 3. Peters SG, Afessa B, Decker PA, Schroeder DR, Offord KP et al. Increased risk associated with pulmonary artery catheterization in the medical intensive care unit. Journal of Critical Care 2003; 18 (3): 166-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2003.08.006
  • 4. Sander M, Spies CD, Grubitzsch H, Foer A, Muller M et al. Comparison of uncalibrated arterial waveform analysis in cardiac surgery patients with thermodilution cardiac output measurements. Critical Care 2006; 10(6): R164. doi: 10.1186/ cc5103
  • 5. Della Rocca G, Costa MG, Coccia C, Pompei L, Di Marco P et al. Cardiac output monitoring: aortic transpulmonary thermodilution and pulse contour analysis agree with standard thermodilution methods in patients undergoing lung transplantation. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2003; 50 (7): 707-711.
  • 6. Halvorsen PS, Espinoza A, Lundblad R, Cvancarova M, Hol PK et al. Agreement between PiCCO pulse contour analysis, pulmonal artery thermodilution and transthoracic thermodilution during off-pump coronary artery by-pass surgery. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2006; 50 (9): 1050-1057. doi: 10.1111/j.1399- 6576.2006.01118.x
  • 7. Felbinger TW, Reuter DA, Eltzschig HK, Bayerlein J, Goetz AE. Cardiac index measurements during rapid preload changes: a comparison of pulmonary artery thermodilution with arterial pulse contour analysis. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 2005; 17 (4): 241-248. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2004.06.013
  • 8. Hofer CK, Cecconi M, Marx G, della Rocca G. Minimally invasive haemodynamic monitoring. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 2009; 26 (12): 996-1002. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e3283300d55
  • 9. Button D, Weibel L, Reuthebuch O, Genoni M, Zollinger A et al. Clinical evaluation of the FloTrac/VigileoTM system and two established continuous cardiac output monitoring devices in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007; 99 (3): 329-36. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem188
  • 10. McGee WT, Horswell JL, Calderon J, Janvier G, Van Severen T et al. Validation of a continuous, arterial pressure-based cardiac output measurement: a multicenter, prospective clinical trial. Critical Care 2007; 11 (5): R105. doi: 10.1186/cc6125
  • 11. Mayer J, Boldt J, Schollhorn T, Rohm KD, Mengistu AM et al. Semi–invasive monitoring of cardiac output by a new device using arterial pressure waveform analysis: a comparison with intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007; 98 (2): 176-182. doi: 10.1093/bja/ael341
  • 12. Hofer CK, Button D, Weibel L, Genoni M, Zollinger A. Uncalibrated radial and femoral arterial pressure waveform analysis for continuous cardiac output measurement: an evaluation in cardiac surgery patients. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 2010; 24(2): 257-264. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2009.06.003
  • 13. Monnet X, Anguel N, Naudin B, Jabot J, Richard C et al. Arterial pressure–based cardiac output in septic patients: different accuracy of pulse contour and uncalibrated pressure waveform devices. Critical Care 2010; 14 (3): R109. doi: 10.1186/cc9058
  • 14. Boettger SF, Pavlovic D, Grundling M, Wendt M, Hung O et al. Comparison of arterial pressure cardiac output monitoring with transpulmonary thermodilution in septic patients. Medical Science Monitor 2010; 16 (3): PR1-7.
  • 15. Sakka SG, Kozieras J, Thuemer O, van Hout N. Measurement of cardiac output: a comparison between transpulmonary thermodilution and uncalibrated pulse contour analysis. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007; 99 (3): 337-342. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem177
  • 16. Compton FD, Zukunft B, Hoffmann C, Zidek W, Schaefer JH. Performance of a minimally invasive uncalibrated cardiac output monitoring system (FloTrac/Vigileo) in haemodynamically unstable patients. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008; 100 (4): 451-456. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem409
  • 17. De Backer D, Marx G, Tan A, Junker C, Van Nuffelen M et al. Arterial pressure–based cardiac output monitoring: a multicenter validation of the third–generation software in septic patients. Intensive Care Medicine 2011; 37 (2): 233-240. doi: 10.1007/s00134-010-2098-8
  • 18. Slagt C, de Leeuw MA, Beute J, Rijnsburger E, Hoeksema M et al. Cardiac output measured by uncalibrated arterial pressure waveform analysis by recently released software version 3.02 versus thermodilution in septic shock. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2013; 27 (2): 171-177. doi: 10.1007/s10877-012-9410-9
  • 19. Monnet X, Vaquer S, Anguel N, Jozwiak M, Cipriani F et al. Comparison of pulse contour analysis by Pulsioflex and Vigileo to measure and track changes of cardiac output in critically ill patients. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2015; 114 (2): 235-243. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu375
  • 20. Marque S, Gros A, Chimot L, Gacouin A, Lavoue S et al. Cardiac output monitoring in septic shock: evaluation of the third– generation FloTrac-Vigileo. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2013; 27 (3): 273-179. doi: 10.1007/s10877- 013-9431-z
  • 21. Ji FH, Li J, Fleming N, Rose D, Liu H. Reliability of a new 4th generation FloTrac algorithm to track cardiac output changes in patients receiving phenylephrine. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2015; 29 (4): 467-473. doi: 10.1007/s10877-014-9624-0
  • 22. Suehiro K, Tanaka K, Mikawa M, Uchihara Y, Matsuyama T et al. Improved performance of the fourth-generation FloTrac/ Vigileo system for tracking cardiac output changes. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 2015; 29 (3): 656-662. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2014.07.022
  • 23. Hattori K, Maeda T, Masubuchi T, Yoshikawa A, Ebuchi K et al. Accuracy and trending ability of the fourth–generation FloTrac/Vigileo system in patients with low cardiac index. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 2017; 31 (1): 99-104. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2016.06.016
  • 24. Eisenried A, Klarwein R, Ihmsen H, Wehrfritz A, Tandler R et al. Accuracy and trending ability of the fourth–generation FloTrac/EV1000 system in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis before and after surgical valve replacement. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 2019; 33 (5): 1230- 1236. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2018.09.015
  • 25. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016; 315 (8): 801-10. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287
  • 26. Kiefer N, Hofer CK, Marx G, Geisen M, Giraud R et al. Clinical validation of a new thermodilution system for the assessment of cardiac output and volumetric parameters. Critical Care 2012; 16 (3): R98. doi: 10.1186/cc11366.
  • 27. Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2007; 17 (4): 571-582. doi: 10.1080/10543400701329422
  • 28. Lin SY, Chou AH, Tsai YF, Chang SW, Yang MW et al. Evaluation of the use of the fourth version FloTrac system in cardiac output measurement before and after cardiopulmonary bypass. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2018; 32 (5): 807-815. doi: 10.1007/s10877-017-0071-6
  • 29. Slagt C, Helmi M, Malagon I, Groeneveld ABJ. Calibrated versus uncalibrated arterial pressure waveform analysis in monitoring cardiac output with transpulmonary thermodilution in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock An observational study. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 2015; 32 (1): 5-12. doi: 10.1097/Eja.0000000000000173
  • 30. Peyton PJ, Chong SW. Minimally invasive measurement of cardiac output during surgery and critical care a meta-analysis of accuracy and precision. Anesthesiology 2010; 113 (5): 1220- 1235. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181ee3130
  • 31. Myles PS, Cui J. Using the Bland-Altman method to measure agreement with repeated measures. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007; 99 (3): 309-311. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem214
  • 32. Critchley LA, Lee A, Ho AMH. A critical review of the ability of continuous cardiac output monitors to measure trends in cardiac output. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2010; 111 (5): 1180- 1192. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181f08a5b
  • 33. Critchley LA, Critchley JA. A meta–analysis of studies using bias and precision statistics to compare cardiac output measurement techniques. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 1999; 15 (2): 85-91.
APA Khwannimit B, Jomsuriya R (2020). Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. , 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
Chicago Khwannimit Bodin,Jomsuriya Rattina Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. (2020): 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
MLA Khwannimit Bodin,Jomsuriya Rattina Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. , 2020, ss.860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
AMA Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. . 2020; 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
Vancouver Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. . 2020; 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
IEEE Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R "Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients." , ss.860 - 869, 2020. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
ISNAD Khwannimit, Bodin - Jomsuriya, Rattina. "Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients". (2020), 860-869. https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1909-58
APA Khwannimit B, Jomsuriya R (2020). Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 50(4), 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
Chicago Khwannimit Bodin,Jomsuriya Rattina Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences 50, no.4 (2020): 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
MLA Khwannimit Bodin,Jomsuriya Rattina Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, vol.50, no.4, 2020, ss.860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
AMA Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences. 2020; 50(4): 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
Vancouver Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences. 2020; 50(4): 860 - 869. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
IEEE Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R "Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients." Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 50, ss.860 - 869, 2020. 10.3906/sag-1909-58
ISNAD Khwannimit, Bodin - Jomsuriya, Rattina. "Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourthgeneration of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients". Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences 50/4 (2020), 860-869. https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1909-58
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
23-04-2024 13:2

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları