Loading…

Validation of continuous thermodilution cardiac output in critically i11 patients with analysis of systematic errors

Purpose: Bolus thermodilution cardiac output (BCO) measurements are affected by variations in injectate volume, rate, and temperature. These variations are eliminated when CO is measured by a continuous automated thermal technique (CCO). Further, CCO eliminates the need for fluid boluses, reduces co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of critical care 1998-12, Vol.13 (4), p.184-189
Main Authors: Medin, Debra L., Brown, Dennis T., Wesley, Robert, Cunnion, Robert E., Ognibene, Frederick F.
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose: Bolus thermodilution cardiac output (BCO) measurements are affected by variations in injectate volume, rate, and temperature. These variations are eliminated when CO is measured by a continuous automated thermal technique (CCO). Further, CCO eliminates the need for fluid boluses, reduces contamination risk, requires no operator, and provides a continuous CO trend. We prospectively evaluated CCO versus BCO in a population of critically ill adults with low, normal, and high CO states. We sought to discern any systematic effects of temperature fluctuations or signal-to-noise-ratios (SNR) on disparities between BCO and CCO measurements and also sought to assess the relative cost effectiveness of the CCO system. Materials and Methods: Pulmonary artery catheterizations were performed in a convenience sample of 20 patients over 6 months. BCO data were obtained using a standardized protocol. Three bolus injections of 5% dextrose were given when each CO was within 10% of the median before averaging; otherwise five boluses were given, with the high and low values eliminated before averaging. Injectates were administered randomly through the respiratory cycle and at 1-minute intervals. CCO measurements were recorded from a Vigilance monitor pre and post BCO measurements, yielding an average CCO value. Also recorded were pre- and post-core temperatures and SNR during the first CCO measurement. Cost data included estimates of operator time for BCO determinations as well as costs of Intellicath (Baxter-Edwards, Irvine, CA) pulmonary artery catheters, Vigilance (Baxter-Edwards, Irvine, CA) monitors, conventional catheters, and injectates. Results: Of the 20 patients, 15 were mechanically ventilated. A total of 306 paired CO values were obtained for analysis. CCO ranged from 2.5 to 14.4 L/min and SCO from 2.4 to 13.3 L/min. Absolute differences between CCO and BCO measurements increased with increasing CO, but percentage differences did not. Of the paired values, 77% were within 1 L/min of one another. Temperature instability and SNR independently had weak correlations with CCO/BCO disparities. The Vigilance system had a slightly higher net cost than conventional BCO, although no economical value was assigned to the clinical usefulness of continuous, as opposed to intermittent, CO monitoring. Conclusions: Continuous CO is a reliable and cost-effective alternative to bolus thermodilution CO for critically ill patients in low, normal, and high CO states.
ISSN:0883-9441
1557-8615
DOI:10.1016/S0883-9441(98)90004-1