Elsevier

Journal of Critical Care

Volume 13, Issue 4, December 1998, Pages 184-189
Journal of Critical Care

Original investigation
Validation of continuous thermodilution cardiac output in critically i11 patients with analysis of systematic errors

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9441(98)90004-1Get rights and content

Abstract

Purpose: Bolus thermodilution cardiac output (BCO) measurements are affected by variations in injectate volume, rate, and temperature. These variations are eliminated when CO is measured by a continuous automated thermal technique (CCO). Further, CCO eliminates the need for fluid boluses, reduces contamination risk, requires no operator, and provides a continuous CO trend. We prospectively evaluated CCO versus BCO in a population of critically ill adults with low, normal, and high CO states. We sought to discern any systematic effects of temperature fluctuations or signal-to-noise-ratios (SNR) on disparities between BCO and CCO measurements and also sought to assess the relative cost effectiveness of the CCO system.

Materials and Methods: Pulmonary artery catheterizations were performed in a convenience sample of 20 patients over 6 months. BCO data were obtained using a standardized protocol. Three bolus injections of 5% dextrose were given when each CO was within 10% of the median before averaging; otherwise five boluses were given, with the high and low values eliminated before averaging. Injectates were administered randomly through the respiratory cycle and at 1-minute intervals. CCO measurements were recorded from a Vigilance monitor pre and post BCO measurements, yielding an average CCO value. Also recorded were pre- and post-core temperatures and SNR during the first CCO measurement. Cost data included estimates of operator time for BCO determinations as well as costs of Intellicath (Baxter-Edwards, Irvine, CA) pulmonary artery catheters, Vigilance (Baxter-Edwards, Irvine, CA) monitors, conventional catheters, and injectates.

Results: Of the 20 patients, 15 were mechanically ventilated. A total of 306 paired CO values were obtained for analysis. CCO ranged from 2.5 to 14.4 L/min and SCO from 2.4 to 13.3 L/min. Absolute differences between CCO and BCO measurements increased with increasing CO, but percentage differences did not. Of the paired values, 77% were within 1 L/min of one another. Temperature instability and SNR independently had weak correlations with CCO/BCO disparities. The Vigilance system had a slightly higher net cost than conventional BCO, although no economical value was assigned to the clinical usefulness of continuous, as opposed to intermittent, CO monitoring.

Conclusions: Continuous CO is a reliable and cost-effective alternative to bolus thermodilution CO for critically ill patients in low, normal, and high CO states.

References (35)

  • R.S. Davis et al.

    Comparison of semi-continuous thermodilution to intermittent bolus thermodilution cardiac output determinations

    Anesthesiology

    (1992)
  • C.E. Ditmyer et al.

    Comparison of continuous with intermittent bolus thermodilution cardiac output measurements

    Am J Crit Care

    (1995)
  • H.C. Gilbert et al.

    Evaluation of continuous cardiac output in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

    Anesthesiology

    (1992)
  • P.R. Lichtenthal et al.

    Clinical evaluation of a continuous cardiac output system in post-op cardiac surgical patients

    Crit Care Med

    (1993)
  • P.R. Lichtenthal et al.

    Accuracy of the Vigilance/ Intellicath Continuous Cardiac Output System during and after cardiac surgery

    Anesthesiology

    (1993)
  • M.K. Ryan et al.

    Comparison of continuous versus manual bolus cardiac output following hemodynamic alterations in a porcine model

    Anesthesiology

    (1993)
  • L. Simon et al.

    Continuous thermodilution cardiac output measurement: An evaluation in sheep

    Anesthesiology

    (1993)
  • Cited by (0)

    This is a US government work. There are no restrictions on its use.

    View full text