Cross-comparison of cardiac output trending accuracy of LiDCO, PiCCO, FloTrac and pulmonary artery catheters

被引:130
作者
Hadian, Mehrnaz [1 ]
Kim, Hyung Kook [1 ]
Severyn, Donald A.
Pinsky, Michael R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Med Ctr, Dept Crit Care Med, Pittsburgh, PA 15261 USA
来源
CRITICAL CARE | 2010年 / 14卷 / 06期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
PULSE-CONTOUR ANALYSIS; MONITORING-SYSTEM; SURGICAL-PATIENTS; CONTROLLED-TRIAL; INTENSIVE-CARE; CRITICALLY-ILL; THERMODILUTION; SURGERY; PRESSURE; AGREEMENT;
D O I
10.1186/cc9335
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Introduction: Although less invasive than pulmonary artery catheters (PACs), arterial pulse pressure analysis techniques for estimating cardiac output (CO) have not been simultaneously compared to PAC bolus thermodilution CO (COtd) or continuous CO (CCO) devices. Methods: We compared the accuracy, bias and trending ability of LiDCO (TM), PiCCO (TM) and FloTrac (TM) with PACs (COtd, CCO) to simultaneously track CO in a prospective observational study in 17 postoperative cardiac surgery patients for the first 4 hours following intensive care unit admission. Fifty-five paired simultaneous quadruple CO measurements were made before and after therapeutic interventions (volume, vasopressor/dilator, and inotrope). Results: Mean CO values for PAC, LiDCO, PiCCO and FloTrac were similar (5.6 +/- 1.5, 5.4 +/- 1.6, 5.4 +/- 1.5 and 6.1 +/- 1.9 L/min, respectively). The mean CO bias by each paired method was -0.18 (PAC-LiDCO), 0.24 (PAC-PiCCO), -0.43 (PAC-FloTrac), 0.06 (LiDCO-PiCCO), -0.63 (LiDCO-FloTrac) and -0.67 L/min (PiCCO-FloTrac), with limits of agreement (1.96 standard deviation, 95% confidence interval) of +/- 1.56, +/- 2.22, +/- 3.37, +/- 2.03, +/- 2.97 and +/- 3.44 L/min, respectively. The instantaneous directional changes between any paired CO measurements displayed 74% (PAC-LiDCO), 72% (PAC-PiCCO), 59% (PAC-FloTrac), 70% (LiDCO-PiCCO), 71% (LiDCO-FloTrac) and 63% (PiCCO-FloTrac) concordance, but poor correlation (r(2) = 0.36, 0.11, 0.08, 0.20, 0.23 and 0.11, respectively). For mean CO < 5 L/min measured by each paired devices, the bias decreased slightly. Conclusions: Although PAC (COTD/CCO), FloTrac, LiDCO and PiCCO display similar mean CO values, they often trend differently in response to therapy and show different interdevice agreement. In the clinically relevant low CO range (< 5 L/min), agreement improved slightly.Thus, utility and validation studies using only one CO device may potentially not be extrapolated to equivalency of using another similar device.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [1] Evaluation of an uncalibrated arterial pulse contour cardiac output monitoring system in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver surgery
    Biancofiore, G.
    Critchley, L. A. H.
    Lee, A.
    Bindi, L.
    Bisa, M.
    Esposito, M.
    Meacci, L.
    Mozzo, R.
    DeSimone, P.
    Urbani, L.
    Filipponi, F.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2009, 102 (01) : 47 - 54
  • [2] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [3] Performance of a minimally invasive uncalibrated cardiac output monitoring system (Flotrac™/Vigileo™) in haemodynamically unstable patients
    Compton, F. D.
    Zukunft, B.
    Hoffmann, C.
    Zidek, W.
    Schaefer, J. -H.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2008, 100 (04) : 451 - 456
  • [4] The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients
    Connors, AF
    Speroff, T
    Dawson, NV
    Thomas, C
    Harrell, FE
    Wagner, D
    Desbiens, N
    Goldman, L
    Wu, AW
    Califf, RM
    Fulkerson, WJ
    Vidaillet, H
    Broste, S
    Bellamy, P
    Lynn, J
    Knaus, WA
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 276 (11): : 889 - 897
  • [5] A meta-analysis of studies using bias and precision statistics to compare cardiac output measurement techniques
    Critchley, LAH
    Critchley, JAJH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, 1999, 15 (02) : 85 - 91
  • [6] Cardiac index measurements during rapid preload changes: a comparison of pulmonary artery thermodilution with arterial pulse contour analysis
    Felbinger, TW
    Reuter, DA
    Eltzschig, HK
    Bayerlein, J
    Goetz, AE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2005, 17 (04) : 241 - 248
  • [7] Gödje O, 2002, CRIT CARE MED, V30, P52
  • [8] Gómez CMH, 1998, BRIT J ANAESTH, V81, P945, DOI 10.1093/bja/81.6.945
  • [9] Evidence-based review of the use of the pulmonary artery catheter: impact data and complications
    Hadian, Mehrnaz
    Pinsky, Michael R.
    [J]. CRITICAL CARE, 2006, 10 (Suppl 3):
  • [10] Hamilton TT, 2002, ANN THORAC SURG, V74, pS1408