LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Cardiac output estimation by pulse wave analysis using the pressure recording analytical method and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution

Photo from wikipedia

BACKGROUND Invasive pulse wave analysis is used in peri-operative settings to estimate cardiac output (CO). The ‘pressure recording analytical method’ (PRAM) implemented in the MostCareUp CO monitor is an invasive… Click to show full abstract

BACKGROUND Invasive pulse wave analysis is used in peri-operative settings to estimate cardiac output (CO). The ‘pressure recording analytical method’ (PRAM) implemented in the MostCareUp CO monitor is an invasive pulse wave analysis method using high-frequency sampling and analysis of the pulse wave to directly estimate the arterial impedance as a key variable of the proprietary CO estimation algorithm. OBJECTIVE To compare CO estimated by PRAM (PRAM-CO; test method) with CO measured by pulmonary artery thermodilution (PATD-CO; reference method). DESIGN Prospective observational method comparison study. PRAM-CO and PATD-CO were assessed simultaneously at five time points with at least 20 min between measurements. Arterial pressure waveforms were carefully checked for damping artefacts and a proprietary electronic filter of the MostCareUp CO monitor was used to optimise waveform quality. SETTING ICU of a German university hospital from August 2018 until April 2019. PATIENTS We included adult patients admitted to the ICU after elective off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery who were monitored with a radial arterial catheter and a pulmonary artery catheter. Patients with severe heart valve insufficiency or persistent arrhythmia were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS PATD-CO and PRAM-CO were compared using Bland-Altman analysis accounting for repeated measurements, the percentage error and trending analysis (four-quadrant plot, concordance rate). RESULTS We analysed 195 paired CO values of 41 patients. Mean PATD-CO and PRAM-CO were 4.99 ± 1.02 and 4.92 ± 1.05 l min−1, respectively. PATD-CO and PRAM-CO ranged from 3.04 to 8.74 and 2.79 to 8.01 l min−1, respectively. The mean of the differences between PATD-CO and PRAM-CO was −0.08 ± 0.74 l min−1 with 95% limits of agreement of −1.55 to +1.40 l min−1. The percentage error was 29.8%. The concordance rate in four-quadrant plot analysis was 92%. CONCLUSION Using the system's electronic waveform filter PRAM-CO shows good agreement and trending ability compared with PATD-CO in adults after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.

Keywords: pulmonary artery; method; pulse wave; wave analysis; analysis

Journal Title: European Journal of Anaesthesiology
Year Published: 2020

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.