Noninvasive cardiac output measurements are inaccurate in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

被引:1
作者
Yahagi, Musashi [1 ]
Omi, Kyuma [1 ]
Maeda, Takuma [2 ]
机构
[1] Hitachi Gen Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol, 317-0077 2-1-1 Jounanchou, Hitachi, Ibaraki 3170065, Japan
[2] Natl Cerebral & Cardiovasc Ctr, Dept Anesthesiol, Suita, Osaka, Japan
关键词
Aortic valve stenosis; Cardiac output; Pulse wave analysis; Thermodilution; Transcatheter aortic valve replacement; Vascular resistance; ARTERIAL-PRESSURE; TRENDING ABILITY; THERMODILUTION; AGREEMENT; ACCURACY; NEXFIN; METAANALYSIS; MONITORS;
D O I
10.4097/kja.21324
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background: Noninvasive cardiac output (CO) measured using ClearSight (TM) eliminates the need for intra-arterial catheter insertion. The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of non-invasive CO measurement in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Methods: Twenty-eight patients undergoing elective transcatheter aortic valve implantation were prospectively enrolled in this study. The CO was simultaneously measured twice before and twice after valve deployment (total of four times) per patient, and the CO was compared between the ClearSight (COClearsight) system and the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) thermodilution (COTD) method as a reference. The Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare the percentage errors between the methods. Results: A total of 112 paired data points were obtained. The percentage error between the COClearSight and COTD was 43.1%. The paired datasets were divided into the following groups according to the systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI): low (< 1,200 dyne s/cm(5)/m(2)) and normal (1,200-2,500 dyne s/cm(5)/m(2)). The percentage errors were 44.9% and 49.4%, respectively. The discrepancy of CO between CO(ClearSight)( )and COTD was not significantly correlated with SVRI (r = -0.06, P < 0.001). The polar plot analysis showed the trending ability of the COClearSight after artificial valve deployment was 51.1% which below the acceptable cut-off (92%). Conclusions: The accuracy and the trending ability of the ClearSight CO measurements were not acceptable in patients with severe AS. Therefore, the ClearSight system is not interchangeable with the PAC thermodilution for determining CO in this population.
引用
收藏
页码:151 / 159
页数:9
相关论文
共 27 条
  • [1] The accuracy of noninvasive cardiac output and pressure measurements with finger cuff: a concise review
    Ameloot, Koen
    Palmers, Pieter-Jan
    Malbrain, Manu L. N. G.
    [J]. CURRENT OPINION IN CRITICAL CARE, 2015, 21 (03) : 232 - 239
  • [2] NONINVASIVE CARDIAC OUTPUT MONITORING DURING EXERCISE TESTING: NEXFIN PULSE CONTOUR ANALYSIS COMPARED TO AN INERT GAS REBREATHING METHOD AND RESPIRED GAS ANALYSIS
    Bartels, Sebastiaan A.
    Stok, Wim J.
    Bezemer, Rick
    Boksem, Remco J.
    van Goudoever, Jeroen
    Cherpanath, Thomas G. V.
    van Lieshout, Johannes J.
    Westerhof, Berend E.
    Karemaker, John M.
    Ince, Can
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, 2011, 25 (05) : 315 - 321
  • [3] Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual
    Bland, J. Martin
    Altman, Douglas G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2007, 17 (04) : 571 - 582
  • [4] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [5] Pulse contour cardiac output derived from non-invasive arterial pressure in cardiovascular disease
    Bogert, L. W. J.
    Wesseling, K. H.
    Schraa, O.
    Van Lieshout, E. J.
    de Mol, B. A. J. M.
    van Goudoever, J.
    Westerhof, B. E.
    van Lieshout, J. J.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA, 2010, 65 (11) : 1119 - 1125
  • [6] Cardiac output monitoring with thermodilution pulse-contour analysis vs. non-invasive pulse-contour analysis
    Boisson, M.
    Poignard, M. E.
    Pontier, B.
    Mimoz, O.
    Debaene, B.
    Frasca, D.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA, 2019, 74 (06) : 735 - 740
  • [7] A comparison of the Nexfin® and transcardiopulmonary thermodilution to estimate cardiac output during coronary artery surgery
    Broch, O.
    Renner, J.
    Gruenewald, M.
    Meybohm, P.
    Schoettler, J.
    Caliebe, A.
    Steinfath, M.
    Malbrain, M.
    Bein, B.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 67 (04) : 377 - 383
  • [8] Noninvasive Continuous Cardiac Output by the Nexfin Before and After Preload-Modifying Maneuvers: A Comparison with Intermittent Thermodilution Cardiac Output
    Bubenek-Turconi, Serban Ion
    Craciun, Mihaela
    Miclea, Ion
    Perel, Azriel
    [J]. ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2013, 117 (02) : 366 - 372
  • [9] 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
  • [10] Assessment of Trending Ability of Cardiac Output Monitors by Polar Plot Methodology
    Critchley, Lester A.
    Yang, Xiao X.
    Lee, Anna
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2011, 25 (03) : 536 - 546