首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Cardiac Output Assessment in Patients Supported with Left Ventricular Assist Device: Discordance between Thermodilution and Indirect Fick Cardiac Output Measurements
【2h】

Cardiac Output Assessment in Patients Supported with Left Ventricular Assist Device: Discordance between Thermodilution and Indirect Fick Cardiac Output Measurements

机译:左心室辅助装置支持的患者的心输出量评估:热稀释和间接性心动过速输出量测量之间的不一致

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Cardiac output (CO) assessed by thermodilution (TD) and indirect Fick (iFK) methods is commonly employed in Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVAD) patients, however no study has assessed agreement. This study assess correlation between these methods, and association with hemodynamic/echocardiographic data in LVAD patients. Discordance was defined as a 20% difference between TD and iFK CO measurements. Bias and agreement were determined via the Bland-Altman technique in both the overall sample and iFK stratified tertiles. Correlation with each assessment of CO and Right Heart Cath (RHC) hemodynamics was performed. Among 111 RHCs, the mean CO for TD and iFK were 4.65 ± 1.33 (Range: 1.44–9.30) and 5.37 ± 1.51 (Range 3.07–11.80) L/min respectively (P<0.001) with a calculated discordance of 45.9%. correlation coefficient of 0.66 with a bias of −0.72 L/min was found. The lower and upper limit of precision were −3.12 and 1.68 L/min respectively. By tertile analysis, bias (lower and upper limit of precision) for the low, middle and high tertile groups were −0.24 (−1.88 and 1.40), −0.48 (−2.50 and 1.53) and −1.39 (−4.18 and 1.39) L/min respectively. No significant correlation was found between either method with right atrial pressure or pulmonary capillary wedge pressure or any valvular condition. Substantial discrepancies exist between TD and iFK CO in LVAD patients. Although fixed bias was small, the limits of agreement extend into the clinically relevant area, with larger bias being present at higher CO. Studies with flow probes are needed to define which method better represents CO in LVAD patients.
机译:通过热稀释(TD)和间接Fick(iFK)方法评估的心输出量(CO)通常用于左心室辅助装置(LVAD)患者,但是尚无研究评估一致性。这项研究评估了这些方法之间的相关性,以及与LVAD患者的血流动力学/超声心动图数据之间的关系。不一致性定义为TD和iFK CO测量值之间的20%差异。通过Bland-Altman技术确定总体样本和iFK分层三分位数中的偏差和一致性。与CO和右心导管(RHC)血流动力学的每次评估相关。在111个RHC中,TD和iFK的平均CO分别为4.65±1.33(范围:1.44–9.30)和5.37±1.51(范围3.07–11.80)L / min(P <0.001),计算出的偏差为45.9%。相关系数为0.66,偏差为-0.72 L / min。精度的下限和上限分别为-3.12和1.68 L / min。通过三分位数分析,低,中和高三分位数组的偏差(精度的上限和下限)为-0.24(-1.88和1.40),-0.48(-2.50和1.53)和-1.39(-4.18和1.39)L / min。在右房压或肺毛细血管楔压或任何瓣膜状况的两种方法之间均未发现显着相关性。 LVAD患者的TD和iFK CO之间存在明显差异。尽管固定偏倚很小,但协议的范围扩展到临床相关领域,较高的CO偏倚存在较大的偏倚。需要使用流量探针进行研究,以确定哪种方法可以更好地代表LVAD患者的CO。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号