Comparison of cardiac output measures by transpulmonary thermodilution, pulse contour analysis, and pulmonary artery thermodilution during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: a subgroup analysis of the cardiovascular anaesthesia registry at a single tertiary centre

Novel Pulse Waveform Index by Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiac Function: A Pilot Study

Background

A simple ambulatory measure of cardiac function could be helpful for monitoring heart failure patients.

Objectives

The purpose of this paper was to determine whether a novel pulse waveform analysis using data obtained by our developed multisensor-ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) device, the 'Sf/Am' ratio, is associated with echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

Methods

Multisensor-ABPM was conducted twice at baseline in 20 heart failure (HF) patients with HF-reduced LVEF or HF-preserved LVEF (median age 66 years, male 65%) and over a 6- to 12-month follow-up after patient-tailored treatment. We assessed the changes in the pulse waveform index Sf/Am and LVEF that occurred between the baseline and follow-up. The Sf/Am consists of the area of the ejection part in the square forward wave (Sf) and the amplitude of the measured wave (Am). We divided the patients into the recovered (n = 11) and not-recovered (n = 9) groups defined by a ≥10% increase in LVEF.

Results

Although the ambulatory BP levels and variabilities did not change in either group, the Sf/Am increased significantly in the recovered group (baseline 21.4 ± 4.5; follow-up, 25.6 ± 3.7, P = 0.004). The not-recovered group showed no difference between the baseline and follow-up. The follow-up/baseline Sf/Am ratio was significantly associated with the LVEF ratio (r = 0.469, P = 0.037). The Sf/Am was significantly correlated with the LVEF in overall measurements (n = 40, r = 0.491, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

These results demonstrated that a novel noninvasive pulse waveform index, the Sf/Am measured by multisensor-ABPM is associated with LVEF. The Sf/Am may be useful for estimating cardiac function.

Prospective Evaluation of a Multibeat Analysis Cardiac Index Estimation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

OBJECTIVES

The decision algorithm for managing patients in cardiogenic shock depends on cardiac index (CI) estimates. Cardiac index estimation via thermodilution (CI-TD) using a pulmonary artery catheter is used commonly for obtaining CI in these patients. Minimally invasive methods of estimating CI, such as multibeat analysis (CI-MBA), may be an alternative in this population.

DESIGN

A prospective, observational study.

SETTING

Cardiac intensive care unit.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-two subjects in cardiogenic shock provided 101 paired CI measurements.

INTERVENTIONS

Measurements were obtained concomitantly by intermittent CI-TD and CI-MBA (Argos Cardiac Output Monitor; Retia Medical, Valhalla, NY). For each CI-TD, CI-MBA estimates were averaged over 1 minute to provide paired values. Bland-Altman and 4-quadrant analyses were performed by plotting changes between successive CI measurements (ΔCI) from each of the 2 methods. Concordance was calculated as a percentage using ΔCI data points from the 2 methods, outside an exclusion zone of 15%.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The correlation coefficient between CI-MBA and CI-TD was 0.78 across patients. Mean CI-TD was 2.19 ± 0.46 L/min/m² and mean CI-MBA was 2.38 ± 0.59 L/min/m². The mean difference between CI-MBA and CI-TD (bias ± SD) was 0.20 ± 0.47 L/min/m², and the limits of agreement were -0.72 to 1.11 L/min/m². The percentage error was 40.0%. The concordance rate was 94%. A secondary analysis of a subgroup of patients during periods of arrhythmia demonstrated a similar accuracy of performance of CI-MBA.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac index-MBA is not interchangeable with CI-TD. However, CI-MBA provides reasonable correlation and clinically acceptable trending ability compared with CI-TD. Cardiac output-MBA may be useful in trending changes in CI in patients with cardiogenic shock, especially in those whose pulmonary artery catheterization placement carries a high risk or is unobtainable.

Validation of cardiac output estimation using the fourth-generation FloTrac/EV1000™ system in patients undergoing robotic-assisted off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC)-despite its invasiveness-remains the gold standard for cardiac output (CO) monitoring. The FloTrac system, a less invasive hemodynamic monitor has been developed, which estimates CO using arterial pressure waveform analysis without external calibration. Recently, an upgraded version of FloTrac system with improved algorithm to follow changes in vascular resistance was introduced into the market. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of the CO estimated from the fourth-generation FloTrac/EV1000 system (CO_FT) compared to that measured with PAC using the thermodilution method (CO_PAC) during robotic-assisted off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. CO_FT and CO_PAC were obtained simultaneously at 4 predefined time points during robotic-assisted OPCAB: 5 min after the induction of general anesthesia (T1), after starting one-lung ventilation (T2), after capnothorax (T3), and after mini-thoracotomy was performed (T4). The agreement of data was investigated by Bland-Altman analysis. Thirty-four patients were initially enrolled. After exclusion, 32 patients and a total of 128 paired CO measurements were obtained. The overall bias was 1.46 L/min, the 95% limits of agreements were - 3.40 to 6.33 L/min, and the percentage error was 72.98%. Regression analysis of the systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI) and the bias between CO_PAC and CO_FT showed that the bias was moderately correlated with the SVRI (r² = 0.43; p < 0.0001). Despite a software upgrade, the reliability of the fourth-generation FloTrac/EV1000™ system during robotic-assisted OPCAB to estimate CO was not acceptable, especially in patients with low SVRI.

Comparison between Fourth-Generation FloTrac/Vigileo System and Continuous Thermodilution Technique for Cardiac Output Estimation after Time Adjustment during Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

(1) Background: Previous studies reported limited performance of arterial pressure waveform-based cardiac output (CO) estimation (FloTrac/Vigileo system; CO-FloTrac) compared with the intermittent thermodilution technique (CO_int). However, errors due to bolus maneuver and intermittent measurements of CO_int could limit its use as a reference. The continuous thermodilution technique (CO_cont) may relieve such limitations. (2) Methods: The performance of CO-FloTrac was retrospectively assessed using continuous recordings of intraoperative physiological data acquired from patients who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (OPCAB) surgery with CO monitoring using both CO-FloTrac and CO_cont. Optimal time adjustments between the two measurements were determined based on R-squared values. (3) Results: A total of 134.2 h of data from 30 patients was included in the final analysis. The mean bias was -0.94 (95% CI, -1.35 to -0.52) L/min and the limits of agreements were -3.64 (95% CI, -4.44 to -3.08) L/min and 1.77 (95% CI, 1.21 to 2.57) L/min. The percentage error was 66.1% (95% CI, 52.4 to 85.8%). Depending on the time scale and the size of the exclusion zone, concordance rates ranged from 61.0% to 75.0%. (4) Conclusion: Despite the time adjustments, CO-FloTrac showed non-negligible overestimation, clinically unacceptable precision, and poor trending ability during OPCAB surgery.

Bioreactance and fourth-generation pulse contour methods in monitoring cardiac index during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) is considered the gold standard for cardiac index monitoring. Recently new and less invasive methods to assess cardiac performance have been developed. The aim of our study was to assess the reliability of a non-invasive monitor utilizing bioreactance (Starling SV) and a non-calibrated mini-invasive pulse contour device (FloTrac/EV1000, fourth-generation software) compared to bolus thermodilution technique with PAC (TDCO) during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (OPCAB). In this prospective study, 579 simultaneous intra- and postoperative cardiac index measurements obtained with Starling SV, FloTrac/EV1000 and TDCO were compared in 20 patients undergoing OPCAB. The agreement of data was investigated by Bland-Altman plots, while trending ability was assessed by four-quadrant plots with error grids. In comparison with TDCO, Starling SV was associated with a bias of 0.13 L min^-1 m^-2 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.18), wide limits of agreement (LOA, - 1.23 to 1.51 L min^-1 m^-2), a percentage error (PE) of 60.7%, and poor trending ability. In comparison with TDCO, FloTrac was associated with a bias of 0.01 L min^-1 m^-2 (95% CI - 0.05 to 0.06), wide LOA (- 1.27 to 1.29 L min^-1 m^-2), a PE of 56.8% and poor trending ability. Both Starling SV and fourth-generation FloTrac showed acceptable mean bias but imprecision due to wide LOA and high PE, and poor trending ability. These findings indicate limited reliability in monitoring cardiac index in patients undergoing OPCAB.

Guidelines for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery. Consensus document of Spanish Societies of Anesthesia (SEDAR), Cardiovascular Surgery (SECCE) and Perfusionists (AEP)

The ERAS guidelines are intended to identify, disseminate and promote the implementation of the best, scientific evidence-based actions to decrease variability in clinical practice. The implementation of these practices in the global clinical process will promote better outcomes and the shortening of hospital and critical care unit stays, thereby resulting in a reduction in costs and in greater efficiency. After completing a systematic review at each of the points of the perioperative process in cardiac surgery, recommendations have been developed based on the best scientific evidence currently available with the consensus of the scientific societies involved.

Agreement between continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution for cardiac output measurement in perioperative and intensive care medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary artery thermodilution is the clinical reference method for cardiac output monitoring. Because both continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution are used in clinical practice it is important to know whether cardiac output measurements by the two methods are clinically interchangeable.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies comparing cardiac output measurements assessed using continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution in adult surgical and critically ill patients. 54 studies with 1522 patients were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

The heterogeneity across the studies was high. The overall random effects model-derived pooled estimate of the mean of the differences was 0.08 (95%-confidence interval 0.01 to 0.16) L/min with pooled 95%-limits of agreement of - 1.68 to 1.85 L/min and a pooled percentage error of 29.7 (95%-confidence interval 20.5 to 38.9)%.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity across clinical studies comparing continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution in adult surgical and critically ill patients is high. The overall trueness/accuracy of continuous pulmonary artery thermodilution in comparison with intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution is good (indicated by a pooled mean of the differences < 0.1 L/min). Pooled 95%-limits of agreement of - 1.68 to 1.85 L/min and a pooled percentage error of 29.7% suggest that continuous pulmonary artery thermodilution barely passes interchangeability criteria with intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020159730.

Comparing the Mutual Interchangeability of ECOM, FloTrac/Vigileo, 3D-TEE, and ITD-PAC Cardiac Output Measuring Systems in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the mutual interchangeability of 4 cardiac output measuring devices by comparing their accuracy, precision, and trending ability.

DESIGN

A single-center prospective observational study.

DESIGN

Nonuniversity teaching hospital, single center.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-four consecutive patients scheduled for elective, nonemergent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

INTERVENTIONS

The cardiac output was measured for each participant using 4 methods: intermittent thermodilution via pulmonary artery catheter (ITD-PAC), Endotracheal Cardiac Output Monitor (ECOM), FloTrac/Vigileo System (FLOTRAC), and 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D-TEE).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Measurements were performed simultaneously at 5 time points: presternotomy, poststernotomy, before cardiopulmonary bypass, after cardiopulmonary bypass, and after sternal closure. A series of statistical and comparison analyses including ANOVA, Pearson correlation, Bland-Altman plots, quadrant plots, and polar plots were performed, and inherent precision for each method and percent errors for mutual interchangeability were calculated. For the 6 two-by-two comparisons of the methods, the Pearson correlation coefficients (r), the percentage errors (% error), and concordance ratios (CR) were as follows: ECOM_versus_ITD-PAC (r = 0.611, % error = 53%, CR = 75%); FLOTRAC_versus_ITD-PAC (r = 0.676, % error = 49%, CR = 77%); 3D-TEE versus ITD-PAC (r = 0.538, % error = 64%, CR = 67%); FLOTRAC_versus_ECOM (r = 0.627, % error = 51%, CR = 75%); 3D-TEE_versus ECOM (r = 0.423, % error = 70%, CR = 60%), and 3D-TEE_versus_FLOTRAC (r = 0.602, % error = 59%, CR = 61%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the recommended statistical measures of interchangeability, ECOM, FLOTRAC, and 3D-TEE are not interchangeable with each other or to the reference standard invasive ITD-PAC method in patients undergoing nonemergent cardiac bypass surgery. Despite the negative result in this study and the majority of previous studies, these less-invasive methods of CO have continued to be used in the hemodynamic management of patients. Each device has its own distinct technical features and inherent limitations; it is clear that no single device can be used universally for all patients. Therefore, different methods or devices should be chosen based on individual patient conditions, including the degree of invasiveness, measurement performance, and the ability to provide real-time, continuous CO readings.

Dynamic Modulation of Device-Arterial Coupling to Determine Cardiac Output and Vascular Resistance

Clinical adoption of mechanical circulatory support for shock is rapidly expanding. Achieving optimal therapeutic benefit requires metrics of state to guide titration and weaning of support. Using the transvalvular positioning of a percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD), device:heart interactions are leveraged to determine cardiac output (CO) and systemic vascular resistance (SVR) near-continuously without disrupting therapeutic function. An automated algorithm rapidly alternates between device support levels to dynamically modulate physiological response. Employing a two-element lumped parameter model of the vasculature, SVR and CO are quantified directly from measurements obtained by the pVAD without external calibration or invasive catheters. The approach was validated in an acute porcine model across a range of cardiac (CO = 3-10.6 L/min) and vascular (SVR = 501-1897 dyn s/cm⁵) states. Cardiac output calculations closely correlated (r = 0.82) to measurements obtained by the pulmonary artery catheter-based thermodilution method with a mean bias of 0.109 L/min and limits of agreement from - 1.67 to 1.89 L/min. SVR was also closely correlated (r = 0.86) to traditional catheter-based measurements with a mean bias of 62.1 dyn s/cm⁵ and limits of agreement from - 260 to 384 dyn s/cm⁵. Use of diagnostics integrated into therapeutic device function enables the potential for optimizing support to improve outcomes for cardiogenic shock.

Best practice & research clinical anaesthesiology: Advances in haemodynamic monitoring for the perioperative patient: Perioperative cardiac output monitoring

Less invasive or even completely non-invasive haemodynamic monitoring technologies have evolved during the last decades. Even established, invasive devices such as the pulmonary artery catheter and transpulmonary thermodilution have still an evidence-based place in the perioperative setting, albeit only in special patient populations. Accumulating evidence suggests to use continuous haemodynamic monitoring, especially flow-based variables such as stroke volume or cardiac output to prevent occult hypoperfusion and, consequently, decrease morbidity and mortality perioperatively. However, there is still a substantial gap between evidence provided by randomised trials and the implementation of haemodynamic monitoring in daily clinical routine. Given the fact that perioperative morbidity and mortality are higher than anticipated and anaesthesiologists are in charge to deal with this problem, the recent advances in minimally invasive and non-invasive monitoring technologies may facilitate more widespread use in the operating theatre, as in addition to costs, the degree of invasiveness of any monitoring tool determines the frequency of its application, at least perioperatively. This review covers the currently available invasive, non-invasive and minimally invasive techniques and devices and addresses their indications and limitations.

Evaluation of the use of the fourth version FloTrac system in cardiac output measurement before and after cardiopulmonary bypass

The FloTrac system is a system for cardiac output (CO) measurement that is less invasive than the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC). The purposes of this study were to (1) compare the level of agreement and trending abilities of CO values measured using the fourth version of the FloTrac system (CCO-FloTrac) and PAC-originated continuous thermodilution (CCO-PAC) and (2) analyze the inadequate CO-discriminating ability of the FloTrac system before and after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Fifty patients were included. After exclusion, 32 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB were analyzed. All patients were monitored with a PAC and radial artery catheter connected to the FloTrac system. CO was assessed at 10 timing points during the surgery. In the Bland-Altman analysis, the percentage errors (bias, the limits of agreement) of the CCO-FloTrac were 61.82% (0.16, - 2.15 to 2.47 L min) and 51.80% (0.48, - 1.97 to 2.94 L min) before and after CPB, respectively, compared with CCO-PAC. The concordance rates in the four-quadrant plot were 64.10 and 62.16% and the angular concordance rates (angular mean bias, the radial limits of agreement) in the polar-plot analysis were 30.00% (17.62°, - 70.69° to 105.93°) and 38.63% (- 10.04°, - 96.73° to 76.30°) before and after CPB, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for CCO-FloTrac was 0.56, 0.52, 0.52, and 0.72 for all, ≥ ± 5, ≥ ± 10, and ≥ ± 15% CO changes (ΔCO) of CCO-PAC before CPB, respectively, and 0.59, 0.55, 0.49, and 0.46 for all, ≥ ± 5, ≥ ± 10, and ≥ ± 15% ΔCO of CCO-PAC after CPB, respectively. When CO < 4 L/min was considered inadequate, the Cohen κ coefficient was 0.355 and 0.373 before and after CPB, respectively. The accuracy, trending ability, and inadequate CO-discriminating ability of the fourth version of the FloTrac system in CO monitoring are not statistically acceptable in cardiac surgery.

Femoral indicator injection for transpulmonary thermodilution using the EV1000/VolumeView(®): do the same criteria apply as for the PiCCO(®)?

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI) obtained by femoral and jugular transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) indicator injections using the EV1000/VolumnView(®) device (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, USA).

METHODS

In an 87-year-old woman with hypovolemic shock and equipped with both jugular and femoral vein access and monitored with the EV1000/VolumeView(®) device, we recorded 10 datasets, each comprising duplicate TPTD via femoral access and duplicate TPTD (20 ml cold saline) via jugular access.

RESULTS

Mean femoral GEDVI ((674.6±52.3) ml/m(2)) was significantly higher than jugular GEDVI ((552.3±69.7) ml/m(2)), with P=0.003. Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a bias of (+122±61) ml/m(2), limits of agreement of -16 and +260 ml/m(2), and a percentage error of 22%. Use of the correction-formula recently suggested for the PiCCO(®) device significantly reduced bias and percentage error. Similarly, mean values of parameters derived from GEDVI such as pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI; 1.244±0.101 vs. 1.522±0.139; P<0.001) and global ejection fraction (GEF; (24.7±1.6)% vs. (28.1±1.8)%; P<0.001) were significantly different in the case of femoral compared to jugular indicator injection. Furthermore, the mean cardiac index derived from femoral indicator injection ((4.50±0.36) L/(min·m²)) was significantly higher (P=0.02) than that derived from jugular indicator injection ((4.12±0.44) L/(min·m²)), resulting in a bias of (+0.38±0.37) L/(min·m²) and a percentage error of 19.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Femoral access for indicator injection results in markedly altered values provided by the EV1000/VolumeView(®), particularly for GEDVI, PVPI, and GEF.

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2016 end of year summary: cardiovascular and hemodynamic monitoring

The assessment and optimization of cardiovascular and hemodynamic variables is a mainstay of patient management in the care for critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) or the operating room (OR). It is, therefore, of outstanding importance to meticulously validate technologies for hemodynamic monitoring and to study their applicability in clinical practice and, finally, their impact on treatment decisions and on patient outcome. In this regard, the Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing (JCMC) is an ideal platform for publishing research in the field of cardiovascular and hemodynamic monitoring. In this review, we highlight papers published last year in the JCMC in order to summarize and discuss recent developments in this research area.