Dataset Information

Comparison of Bioimpedance Versus Pulse Contour Analysis for Intraoperative Cardiac Index Monitoring in Patients Undergoing Kidney Transplantation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cardiac index (CI; cardiac output indexed to body surface area) is routinely measured during kidney transplant surgery. Bioimpedance cardiometry is a transthoracic impedance as the non-invasive alternative for hemodynamic monitoring, using semi-invasive uncalibrated pulse wave or contour (UPC) analysis.

Objectives

We performed a cross-sectional observational study on 50 kidney transplant patients to compare the CI measurement agreement, concordance rate, and trending ability between bioimpedance and UPC analysis.

Methods

For each patient, CI was measured by bioimpedance analysis (ICON^TM) and UPC analysis (EV1000^TM) devices at three time points: after induction, during incision, and at reperfusion. The device measurement accuracy was assessed by the bias value, limit of agreement (LoA), and percentage error (PE) using Bland-Altman analyses. Trending ability was assessed by angular bias and polar concordance through four-quadrant and polar plot analyses.

Results

From each time point and pooled measurement, the correlation coefficients were 0.267, 0.327, 0.321, and 0.348. Bland-Altman analyses showed mean bias values of 1.18, 1.06, 1.48, and 1.30, LoA of -1.35 to 3.72, -1.39 to 3.51, -1.07 to 4.04, and -1.17 to 3.78, and PE of 82.21, 78.50, 68.74, and 74.58%, respectively. Polar plot analyses revealed angular bias values of -10.37º, -15.01º, -18.68º, and -12.62º, with radial LoA of 89.79º, 85.86º, 83.38º, and 87.82º, respectively. The four-quadrant plot concordance rates were 70.77, 67.35, 65.90, and 69.79%. These analyses showed poor agreement, weak concordance, and low trending ability of bioimpedance cardiometry to UPC analysis.

Conclusions

Bioimpedance and UPC analysis for CI measurements were not interchangeable in patients undergoing kidney transplant surgery. Cardiac index monitoring using bioimpedance cardiometry during kidney transplantation should be interpreted cautiously because it showed poor reliability due to low accuracy, precision, and trending ability for CI measurement.

SUBMITTER: Aditianingsih D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8782196 | 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:BackgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is a common surgical complication and is associated with intraoperative hypotension. However, the total duration and magnitude of intraoperative hypotension associated with AKI remains unknown. In this study, the causal relationship between the intraoperative arterial pressure and postoperative AKI was investigated among chronic hypertension patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of 6552 hypertension patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (2011 to 2019) was conducted. The primary outcome was AKI as diagnosed with the Kidney Disease-Improving Global Outcomes criteria and the primary exposure was intraoperative hypotension. Patients' baseline demographics, pre- and post-operative data were harvested and then analyzed with multivariable logistic regression to assess the exposure-outcome relationship.ResultsAmong 6552 hypertension patients, 579 (8.84%) had postoperative AKI after non-cardiac surgery. The proportions of patients admitted to ICU (3.97 vs. 1.24%, p < 0.001) and experiencing all-cause death (2.76 vs. 0.80%, p < 0.001) were higher in the patients with postoperative AKI. Moreover, the patients with postoperative AKI had longer hospital stays (13.50 vs. 12.00 days, p < 0.001). Intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) < 60 mmHg for >20 min was an independent risk factor of postoperative AKI. Furthermore, MAP <60 mmHg for >10 min was also an independent risk factor of postoperative AKI in patients whose MAP was measured invasively in the subgroup analysis.ConclusionsOur work suggested that MAP < 60 mmHg for >10 min measured invasively or 20 min measured non-invasively during non-cardiac surgery may be the threshold of postoperative AKI development in hypertension patients. This work may serve as a perioperative management guide for chronic hypertension patients.Trial registrationclinical trial number: ChiCTR2100050209 (8/22/2021). http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=132277.