Dataset Information

Stroke volume and cardiac output non-invasive monitoring based on brachial oscillometry-derived pulse contour analysis: Explanatory variables and reference intervals throughout life (3-88 years).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Non-invasive assessment of stroke volume (SV), cardiac output (CO) and cardiac index (CI) has shown to be useful for the evaluation, diagnosis and/or management of different clinical conditions. Through pulse contour analysis (PCA) cuff‑based oscillometric devices would enable obtaining ambulatory operator-independent non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring. There are no reference intervals (RIs), when considered as a continuum in childhood, adolescence and adult life, for PCA-derived SV [SV(PCA)], CO [CO(PCA)] and CI [CI(PCA)]. The aim of the study were to analyze the associations of SV(PCA), CO(PCA) and CI(PCA) with demographic, anthropometric, cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and hemodynamic parameters, and to define RIs and percentile curves for SV(PCA), CO(PCA) and CI(PCA), considering the variables that should be considered when expressing them.

Methods

In 1449 healthy subjects (3-88 years) SV(PCA), CO(PCA) and CI(PCA) were non-invasively obtained (Mobil-O-Graph; Germany).

Analysis

associations between subject characteristics and SV(PCA), CO(PCA) and CI(PCA) levels (correlations; regression models); RIs and percentiles for SV(PCA), CO(PCA) and CI(PCA) (parametric methods; fractional polynomials).

Results

Sex, age, and heart rate would be explanatory variables for SV, CO, and CI levels. SV levels were also examined by body height, while body surface area (BSA) contributing to evaluation of CO and CI. CVRFs exposure did not contribute to independently explain the values of the dependent variables. SV, CO and CI levels were partially explained by the oscillometric-derived signal quality. RIs and percentiles were defined.

Conclusions

Reference intervals and percentile for SV(PCA), CO(PCA) and CI(PCA), were defined for subjects from 3-88 years of age, results are expressed according to sex, age, heart rate, body height and/or BSA.

SUBMITTER: Zocalo Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8747806 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Cardiac output measurement with pulse contour analysis is a continuous, mini-invasive, operator-independent, widely used, and cost-effective technique, which could be helpful to assess changes in cardiac output. The 4-quadrant plot and the polar plot have been described to compare the changes between 2 measurements performed under different conditions, and the direction of change by using different methods of measurements. However, the 4-quadrant plot and the polar plot present a number of limitations, with a risk of misinterpretation in routine clinical practice. We describe a new trend interchangeability method designed to objectively define the interchangeability of each change of a variable. Using the repeatability of the reference method, we classified each change as either uninterpretable or interpretable and then as either noninterchangeable, in the gray zone or interchangeable. An interchangeability rate can then be calculated by the number of interchangeable changes divided by the total number of interpretable changes. In this observational study, we used this objective method to assess cardiac output changes with 5 arterial pulse contour techniques (Wesseling's method, LiDCO, PiCCO, Hemac method, and Modelflow) in comparison with bolus thermodilution technique as reference method in 24 cardiac surgery patients. A total of 172 cardiac output variations were available from the 199 data points: 88 (51%) were uninterpretable, according to the first step of the method. The second step of the method, based on the 84 (49%) interpretable variations, showed that only 18 (21%) to 30 (36%) variations were interchangeable regardless of the technique used. None of pulse contour cardiac output technique could be interchangeable with bolus thermodilution to assess changes in cardiac output using the trend interchangeability method in cardiac surgery patients. Future studies may consider using this method to assess interchangeability of changes between different methods of measurements.

Project description:BackgroundCardiac output (CO) is a key measure of adequacy of organ and tissue perfusion, especially in critically ill or complex surgical patients. CO monitoring technology continues to evolve. Recently developed CO monitors rely on unique algorithms based on pulse contour analysis of an arterial blood pressure (ABP) waveform. The objective of this investigation was to compare the accuracy of two monitors using different methods of pulse contour analysis - the Retia Argos device and the Edwards Vigileo-FloTrac device - with pulmonary artery catheter (PAC)-thermodilution as a reference.MethodsFifty-eight patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery formed the study cohort. A total of 572 triplets of CO measurements from each device - Argos, Vigileo-FloTrac (third generation), and thermodilution - were available before and after interventions (e.g., vasopressors, fluids, and inotropes). Bland-Altman analysis accounting for repeated measurements per subject and concordance analysis were applied to assess the accuracy of the CO values and intervention-induced CO changes of each pulse contour device against thermodilution. Cluster bootstrapping was employed to statistically compare the root-mean-squared-errors (RMSE = √(μ2 + σ2), where μ and σ are the Bland-Altman bias and precision errors) and concordance rates of the two devices.ResultsThe RMSE (mean (95% confidence intervals)) for CO values was 1.16 (1.00-1.32) L/min for the Argos device and 1.54 (1.33-1.77) L/min for the Vigileo-FloTrac device; the concordance rate for intervention-induced CO changes was 87 (82-92)% for the Argos device and 72 (65-78)% for the Vigileo-FloTrac device; and the RMSE for the CO changes was 17 (15-19)% for the Argos device and 21 (19-23)% for the Vigileo-FloTrac device (p < 0.0167 for all comparisons).ConclusionsIn comparison with CO measured by the PAC, the Argos device proved to be more accurate than the Vigileo-FloTrac device in CO trending and absolute CO measurement in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.

Project description:While invasive thermodilution techniques remain the reference methods for cardiac output (CO) measurement, there is a currently unmet need for non-invasive techniques to simplify CO determination, reduce complications related to invasive procedures required for indicator dilution CO measurement, and expand the application field toward emergency room, non-intensive care, or outpatient settings. We evaluated the performance of a non-invasive oscillometry-based CO estimation method compared to transpulmonary thermodilution. To assess agreement between the devices, we used Bland-Altman analysis. Four-quadrant plot analysis was used to visualize the ability of Mobil-O-Graph (MG) to track CO changes after a fluid challenge. Trending analysis of CO trajectories was used to compare MG and PiCCO® calibrated pulse wave analysis over time (6 h). We included 40 patients from the medical intensive care unit at the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin between November 2019 and June 2020. The median age was 73 years. Forty percent of the study population was male; 98% was ventilator-dependent and 75% vasopressor-dependent at study entry. The mean of the observed differences for the cardiac output index (COI) was 0.7 l∗min-1*m-2 and the lower, and upper 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were -1.9 and 3.3 l∗min-1*m-2, respectively. The 95% confidence interval for the LOA was ± 0.26 l∗min-1*m-2, the percentage error 83.6%. We observed concordant changes in CO with MG and PiCCO® in 50% of the measurements after a fluid challenge and over the course of 6 h. Cardiac output calculation with a novel oscillometry-based pulse wave analysis method is feasible and replicable in critically ill patients. However, we did not find clinically applicable agreement between MG and thermodilution or calibrated pulse wave analysis, respectively, assessed with established evaluation routine using the Bland-Altman approach and with trending analysis methods. In summary, we do not recommend the use of this method in critically ill patients at this time. As the basic approach is promising and the CO determination with MG very simple to perform, further studies should be undertaken both in hemodynamically stable patients, and in the critical care setting to allow additional adjustments of the underlying algorithm for CO estimation with MG.