Cardiac output measurements via echocardiography versus thermodilution: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:56
作者
Zhang, Yun [1 ]
Wang, Yan [2 ]
Shi, Jing [1 ]
Hua, Zhiqiang [1 ]
Xu, Jinyu [1 ]
机构
[1] Nanjing Med Univ, Wuxi Peoples Hosp, Dept Emergency Med, Wuxi, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] Nanjing Med Univ, Wuxi Peoples Hosp, Dept Educ, Wuxi, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
来源
PLOS ONE | 2019年 / 14卷 / 10期
关键词
CORONARY-ARTERY-BYPASS; ESOPHAGEAL DOPPLER ULTRASOUND; INTENSIVE-CARE-UNIT; TRANSESOPHAGEAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; CLINICAL-EVALUATION; WAVE DOPPLER; AORTIC-VALVE; CARDIOPULMONARY BYPASS; TRANSTRACHEAL DOPPLER; SURGICAL-PATIENTS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0222105
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Echocardiography, as a noninvasive hemodynamic evaluation technique, is frequently used in critically ill patients. Different opinions exist regarding whether it can be interchanged with traditional invasive means, such as the pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution (TD) technique. This systematic review aimed to analyze the consistency and interchangeability of cardiac output measurements by ultrasound (US) and TD. Five electronic databases were searched for studies including clinical trials conducted up to June 2019 in which patients' cardiac output was measured by ultrasound techniques (echocardiography) and TD. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by two independent reviewers who used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2), which was tailored according to our systematic review in Review Manager 5.3. A total of 68 studies with 1996 patients were identified as eligible. Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were used to compare the cardiac output (CO) measured using the different types of echocardiography and different sites of Doppler use with TD. No significant differences were found between US and TD (random effects model: mean difference [MD], -0.14; 95% confidence interval, -0.30 to 0.02; P = 0.08). No significant differences were observed in the subgroup analyses using different types of echocardiography and different sites except for ascending aorta (AA) (random effects model: mean difference [MD], -0.37; 95% confidence interval, -0.74 to -0.01; P = 0.05) of Doppler use. The median of bias and limits of agreement were -0.12 and +/- 0.94 L/min, respectively; the median of correlation coefficient was 0.827 (range, 0.140-0.998). Although the difference in CO between echocardiography by different types or sites and TD was not entirely consistent, the overall effect of meta-analysis showed that no significant differences were observed between US and TD. The techniques may be interchangeable under certain conditions.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 79 条
  • [1] Cardiac Output Estimation After Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass: A Comparison of Two Different Techniques
    Arora, Dheeraj
    Chand, Rajesh
    Mehta, Yatin
    Trehan, Naresh
    [J]. ANNALS OF CARDIAC ANAESTHESIA, 2007, 10 (02) : 132 - 136
  • [2] Comparison of transesophageal echocardiographic, Fick, and thermodilution cardiac output in critically ill patients
    Axler, O
    Tousignant, C
    Thompson, CR
    DallavaSantucci, J
    Phang, PT
    Russell, JA
    Walley, KR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, 1996, 11 (03) : 109 - 116
  • [3] Automated cardiac output measurements by ultrasound are inaccurate at high cardiac outputs
    Basdogan, F
    Visser, W
    Struijk, PC
    Jansen, JRC
    Vletter, WB
    Wladimiroff, JW
    Lotgering, FK
    [J]. ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2000, 15 (06) : 508 - 512
  • [4] Validation of an Ultrasound Cardiac Output Monitor as a Bedside Tool for Pediatric Patients
    Beltramo, Fernando
    Menteer, Jondavid
    Razavi, Asma
    Khemani, Robinder G.
    Szmuszkovicz, Jacqueline
    Newth, Christopher J. L.
    Ross, Patrick A.
    [J]. PEDIATRIC CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 37 (01) : 177 - 183
  • [5] PULSED DOPPLER ULTRASOUND COMPARED WITH THERMODILUTION FOR MONITORING CARDIAC-OUTPUT RESPONSES TO CHANGING LEFT-VENTRICULAR FUNCTION
    BOJANOWSKI, LMR
    TIMMIS, AD
    NAJM, YC
    GOSLING, RG
    [J]. CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH, 1987, 21 (04) : 260 - 268
  • [6] Measurement of cardiac output before and after cardiopulmonary bypass:: Comparison among aortic transit-time ultrasound, thermodilution, and noninvasive partial CO2 rebreathing
    Botero, M
    Kirby, D
    Lobato, EB
    Staples, ED
    Gravenstein, N
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2004, 18 (05) : 563 - 572
  • [7] Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring by aortic blood flow determination:: Evaluation of the Sometec Dynemo-3000 system
    Cariou, A
    Monchi, M
    Joly, LM
    Bellenfant, F
    Claessens, YE
    Thébert, D
    Brunet, F
    Dhainaut, JF
    [J]. CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 1998, 26 (12) : 2066 - 2072
  • [8] SIMULTANEOUS MEASUREMENT OF CARDIAC-OUTPUT BY THERMODILUTION, THORACIC ELECTRICAL BIOIMPEDANCE AND DOPPLER ULTRASOUND
    CASTOR, G
    KLOCKE, RK
    STOLL, M
    HELMS, J
    NIEDERMARK, I
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1994, 72 (01) : 133 - 138
  • [9] Cardiac output estimation with a new Doppler device after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery
    Chand, Rajesh
    Mehta, Yatin
    Trehan, Naresh
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2006, 20 (03) : 315 - 319
  • [10] Continuous recording of pulmonary artery diastolic pressure and cardiac output using a novel ultrasound transducer
    Chandraratna, PAN
    Brar, R
    Vijayasekaran, S
    Chen, QX
    Niguse, GT
    Shaikh, Y
    Cho, HD
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, 2002, 15 (11) : 1381 - 1386