Comparison of a supra-sternal cardiac output monitor (USCOM) with the pulmonary artery catheter

British Journal of Anaesthesia

Volumn 103, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 800-804

  Thom, O ^a   Taylor, D M ^b   Wolfe, R E ^c   Cade, J ^c   Myles, P ^d   Krum, H ^e   Wolfe, R ^e  

^a BOX HILL HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^b AUSTIN HEALTH   (Australia)

^c ROYAL MELBOURNE HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^d ALFRED HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^e MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Heart, cardiac output; Measurement techniques, cardiac output; Monitoring, intensive care

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR EQUIPMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; FEMALE; HEART ATRIUM FIBRILLATION; HEART OUTPUT MEASUREMENT; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PULMONARY ARTERY CATHETER; SINUS RHYTHM; SUPRA STERNAL CARDIAC OUTPUT MONITOR; TERTIARY HEALTH CARE; THERMODILUTION;

EID: 71749098943     PISSN: 00070912     EISSN: 14716771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bja/aep296     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Blow O, Magliore L, Claridge JA, et al. The golden hour and the silver day: Detection and correction of occult hypoperfusion within 24 hours improves outcome from major trauma. J Trauma 1999; 47: 964-9
2. Wo CC, Shoemaker WC, Appel PL, et al. Unreliability of blood pressure and heart rate to evaluate cardiac output in emergency resuscitation and critical illness. Crit Care Med 1993; 21: 218-23
3. Kern JW, Shoemaker WC. Meta-analysis of hemodynamic optimization in high-risk patients. Crit Care Med 2002; 30: 1686-92
4. Connors AF, Jr, Speroff T, Dawson NV, et al. The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients. SUPPORT Investigators. J Am Med Assoc 1996; 276: 889-97
5. Iberti TJ, Fischer EP, Leibowitz AB, et al. A multicenter study of physicians' knowledge of the pulmonary artery catheter. Pulmonary Artery Catheter Study Group. J Am Med Assoc 1990; 264: 2928-32
6. Knobloch K, Hubrich V, Rohmann P, et al. Feasibility of preclinical cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance in HEMS in thoracic pain-the ultrasonic cardiac output monitor. Air Med J 2006; 25: 270-5
7. Siu CW, Tse HF, Lee K, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy optimization by ultrasonic cardiac output monitoring (USCOM) device. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007; 30: 50-5
8. Dey I, Sprivulis P. Emergency physicians can reliably assess emergency department patient cardiac output using the USCOM continuous wave Doppler cardiac output monitor. Emerg Med Australas 2005; 17: 193-9
9. Nguyen HB, Losey T, Rasmussen J, et al. Interrater reliability of cardiac output measurements by transcutaneous Doppler ultrasound: Implications for noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring in the ED. Am J Emerg Med 2006; 24: 828-35
10. Chand R, Mehta Y, Trehan N. Cardiac output estimation with a new Doppler device after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2006; 20: 315-9
11. Van Den Oever HL, Murphy EJ, Christie-Taylor GA. USCOM (Ultrasonic Cardiac Output Monitors) lacks agreement with thermodilution cardiac output and transoesophageal echocardiography valve measurements. Anaesth Intensive Care 2007; 35: 903-10
12. Critchley LA, Critchley JA. A meta-analysis of studies using bias and precision statistics to compare cardiac output measurement techniques. J Clin Monit Comput 1999; 15: 85-91
13. Jones B, Jarvis P, Lewis JA, et al. Trials to assess equivalence: The importance of rigorous methods. Br Med J 1996; 313: 36-9
14. McGee WT, Horswell JL, Calderon J, et al. Validation of a continuous, arterial pressure-based cardiac output measurement: A multicenter, prospective clinical trial. Crit Care 2007; 11: R105
15. Knobloch K, Lichtenberg A, Winterhalter M, et al. Non-invasive cardiac output determination by two-dimensional independent Doppler during and after cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 80: 1479-83 (Pubitemid 41354141)
16. Jansen JR. The thermodilution method for the clinical assessment of cardiac output. Intensive Care Med 1995; 21: 691-7