The accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourth-generation FloTrac/Vigileo system™ and the Fick method in cardiac surgery patients

被引:0
作者
Takuma Maeda
Eisuke Hamaguchi
Naoko Kubo
Akira Shimokawa
Hiroko Kanazawa
Yoshihiko Ohnishi
机构
[1] National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center,Department of Anesthesiology
[2] National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center,Division of Transfusion Medicine
来源
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing | 2019年 / 33卷
关键词
Blood pressure monitor; Cardiac output; Fick principle; Thermodilution;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
To compare the accuracy and trending ability of the cardiac index (CI) measured by FloTrac/Vigileo™ (CIFT) or derived by the Fick equation (CIFick) using E-CAiOVX (enables continuous monitoring of oxygen consumption) with that measured by thermodilution (CITD) in patients with off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. Twenty-two patients undergoing elective off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery were included. CIFT and CIFick were determined simultaneously at six time-points during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. At each time-point, phenylephrine (50 µg) was administered to increase systematic vascular resistance, with CI measured before and after administration (CITD used as reference method). Agreement of each method was evaluated by Bland–Altman analysis, while trending ability was evaluated by four-quadrant plot analysis and polar plot analysis. By Bland–Altman analysis, CIFT and CIFick showed percentage errors of 49.5% and 78.6%, respectively, compared with CITD. Subgroup analysis showed a percentage error between COFT and COTD of 28.9% in patients with a CI ≥ 2.4 L/min/m2, and 78.1% in patients with a CI ≥ 2.4 L/min/m2. The concordance rate of four-quadrant plot analysis was 93.3% for CIFT and 66.7% for CIFick in datasets where CITD ≥ 2.4 L/min/m2 before and after phenylephrine administration were included. CIFT and CIFick had wide limits of agreement with CITD, and were below acceptable limits for tracking phenylephrine-induced CI changes. However, subgroup analysis showed improved accuracy and trending ability of CIFT when only points where CITD ≥ 2.4 L/min/m2 were included, while there was no improvement in CIFick accuracy or trending ability.
引用
收藏
页码:767 / 776
页数:9
相关论文
共 128 条
  • [1] Biancofiore G(2011)Evaluation of a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo (version 3.02) and a comparison with previous data in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver transplant surgery Anesth Analg 113 515-522
  • [2] Critchley LA(2013)Systemic vascular resistance has an impact on the reliability of the Vigileo-FloTrac system in measuring cardiac output and tracking cardiac output changes Br J Anaesth 111 170-177
  • [3] Lee A(2014)Inaccuracy of the FloTrac/Vigileo system in patients with low cardiac index J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 28 1521-1526
  • [4] Yang XX(2017)Accuracy and Trending ability of the fourth-generation FloTrac/Vigileo system in patients with low cardiac index J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 31 99-104
  • [5] Bindi LM(2018)Accuracy and trending ability of the fourth-generation FloTrac/Vigileo system in patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery J Anesth 32 387-393
  • [6] Esposito M(2015)Improved performance of the fourth-generation flotrac/vigileo system for tracking cardiac output changes J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 29 656-662
  • [7] Bisa M(2010)Cardiac output monitoring: is there a gold standard and how do the newer technologies compare? Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 14 274-282
  • [8] Meacci L(2015)Cardiac output monitoring: a contemporary assessment and review Crit Care Med 43 177-185
  • [9] Mozzo R(2009)Tracking changes in cardiac output: methodological considerations for the validation of monitoring devices Intensive Care Med 35 1801-1808
  • [10] Filipponi F(2017)Accuracy and precision of non-invasive cardiac output monitoring devices in perioperative medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis dagger Br J Anaesth 118 298-310