Update on minimally invasive hemodynamic monitoring in thoracic anesthesia

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 28-35

  Hofer, Christoph K ^a   Rex, Steffen ^b,c   Ganter, Michael T ^d  

^a TRIEMLI HOSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d Institute of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

bioimpedance; bioreactance; cardiac output; minimal invasive monitoring; oesophageal Doppler,partial CO2 rebreathing; pulse contour analysis; pulse wave analysis

Indexed keywords

ANESTHESIA; ANESTHESIA LEVEL; DOPPLER DEVICE; DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEART OUTPUT; HEART STROKE VOLUME; HEMODYNAMIC MONITORING; HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS; HUMAN; LUNG HEMODYNAMICS; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; OXYGEN SATURATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PULSE PRESSURE; PULSE WAVE; REVIEW; TISSUE OXYGENATION; VENOUS OXYGEN TENSION;

ANESTHESIA; CARDIAC OUTPUT; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMANS; LACTIC ACID; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE; OXYGEN; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; THORACIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84891835696     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: 14736500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000034     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Carl M, Alms A, Braun J, et al. S3 guidelines for intensive care in cardiac surgery patients: hemodynamic monitoring and cardiocirculatory system. Ger Med Sci 2010; 8:1-25.
2. Werdan K, Ruß M, Buerke M, et al. Cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction: diagnosis, monitoring and treatment: a German-Austrian S3 Guideline. Intensive Med 2011; 48:291-344.
3. Gurgel ST, do Nascimento P. Maintaining tissue perfusion in high-risk surgical patients: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Anesth Analg 2011; 112:1384-1391.
4. Hamilton MA, Cecconi M, Rhodes A. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the use of preemptive hemodynamic intervention to improve postoperative outcomes in moderate and high-risk surgical patients. Anesth Analg 2011; 112:1392-1402.
5. Sandham JD, Hull RD, Brant RF, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of the use of pulmonary-artery catheters in high-risk surgical patients. N Engl J Med 2003; 348:5-14.
6. Schwann NM, Hillel Z, Hoeft A, et al. Lack of effectiveness of the pulmonary artery catheter in cardiac surgery. Anesth Analg 2011; 113:994-1002.
7. Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreed statistics: measurement method comparison. Anesthesiology 2012; 116:182-185.
8. 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.
9. Peyton PJ, Chong SW. Minimally invasive measurement of cardiac output during surgery and critical care: a meta-analysis of accuracy and precision. Anesthesiology 2010; 113:1220-1235.
10. Critchley LAH. Bias and precision statistics: should we still adhere to the 30% benchmark for cardiac output monitor validation studies? Anesthesiology 2011; 114:1244.
11. Cecconi M, Rhodes A, Poloniecki J, et al. Bench-to-bedside review: the importance of the precision of the reference technique in method comparison studies: with specific reference to the measurement of cardiac output. Crit Care 2009; 13:201.
12. Critchley LA, Lee A, Ho AMH. A critical review of the ability of continuous cardiac output monitors to measure trends in cardiac output. Anesth Analg 2010; 111:1180-1192.
13. Vincent J-L. So we use less pulmonary artery catheters: but why? Crit Care Med 2011; 39:1820-1822.
14. Fleisher LA, Beckman JA, Brown KA, et al. 2009ACCF/AHA Focused Update on Perioperative Beta Blockade Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Care for Noncardiac Surgery. JAC 2009; 54:e13-e18.
15. Vincent J-L, Rhodes A, Perel A, et al. Clinical review: update on hemodynamic monitoring-a consensus of 16. Crit Care 2011; 15:229.
16. Squara P, Denjean D, Estagnasie P, et al. Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring (NICOM): a clinical validation. Intensive Care Med 2007; 33:1191-1194.
17. de Waal EEC, Konings MK, Kalkman CJ, Buhre WF. Assessment of stroke volume index with three different bioimpedance algorithms: lack of agreement compared to thermodilution. Intensive Care Med 2008; 34:735-739.
18. Fellahi JL, Fischer MO, Rebet O, et al. A comparison of endotracheal bioimpedance cardiography and transpulmonary thermodilution in cardiac surgery patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2012; 26:217-222.
19. Kupersztych-Hagege E, Teboul JL. Bioreactance is not reliable for estimating cardiac output and the effects of passive leg raising in critically ill patients. Br J Anaesth 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
20. Fagnoul D, Vincent J-L, Backer DD. Cardiac output measurements using the bioreactance technique in critically ill patients. Crit Care 2012; 16:460.
21. Jaffe MB. Partial CO2 rebreathing cardiac output: operating principles of the NICO system. J Clin Monit Comput 1999; 15:387-401.
22. Ng J-M, Chow MY, Ip-Yam PC, et al. Evaluation of partial carbon dioxide rebreathing cardiac output measurement during thoracic surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2007; 21:655-658.
23. Diaper J, Ellenberger C, Villiger Y, et al. Transoesophageal Doppler monitoring for fluid and hemodynamic treatment during lung surgery. J Clin Monit Comput 2008; 22:367-374.
24. Diaper J, Ellenberger C, Villiger Y, et al. Comparison of cardiac output as assessed by transesophageal echo-Doppler and transpulmonary thermodilution in patients undergoing thoracic surgery. J Clin Anesth 2010; 22:97-103.
25. Gö dje O, Hö ke K, Goetz AE, et al. Reliability of a new algorithm for continuous cardiac output determination by pulse-contour analysis during hemodynamic instability. Crit Care Med 2002; 30:52-58.
26. Rocca Della G, Costa MG, Coccia C, et al. Cardiac output monitoring: aortic transpulmonary thermodilution and pulse contour analysis agree with standard thermodilution methods in patients undergoing lung transplantation. Can J Anaesth 2003; 50:707-711.
27. Kiefer N, Hofer CK, Marx G, et al. Clinical validation of a new thermodilution system for the assessment of cardiac output and volumetric parameters. Crit Care 2012; 16:R98.
28. Bendjelid K, Marx G, Kiefer N, et al. Performance of a new pulse contour method for continuous cardiac output monitoring: validation in critically ill patients. Br J Anaesth 2013; 111:573-579.
29. Tokarik M, Sjö berg F, Balik M, et al. Fluid Therapy LiDCO Controlled Trial-Optimization of Volume Resuscitation of Extensively Burned Patients through Noninvasive Continuous Real-Time Hemodynamic Monitoring LiDCO. J Burn Care Res 2013; 34:537-542.
30. Goepfert MS, Richter HP, Eulenburg CZ, et al. Individually optimized hemodynamic therapy reduces complications and length of stay in the intensive care unit: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Anesthesiology 2013; 119:824-836.
31. de Waal EEC, Kalkman CJ, Rex S, Buhre WF. Validation of a new arterial pulse contour-based cardiac output device. Crit Care Med 2007; 35:1904-1909.
32. Bubenek-Turconi SI, Craciun M, Miclea I, Perel A. Noninvasive continuous cardiac output by the nexfin before and after preload-modifying maneuvers: a comparison with intermittent thermodilution cardiac output. Anesth Analg 2013; 117:366-372.
33. Monnet X, Dres M, Ferre A, et al. Prediction of fluid responsiveness by a continuous noninvasive assessment of arterial pressure in critically ill patients: comparison with four other dynamic indices. Br J Anaesth 2012; 109:330-338.
34. Cannesson M, Tran NP, Cho M, et al. Predicting fluid responsiveness with stroke volume variation despite multiple extrasystoles. Crit Care Med 2012; 40:193-198.
35. Metzelder S, Coburn M, Fries M, et al. Performance of cardiac output measurement derived from arterial pressure waveform analysis in patients requiring high-dose vasopressor therapy. Br J Anaesth 2011; 106:776-784.
36. Biancofiore G, Critchley LAH, Lee A, et al. Evaluation of a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo (version 3.02) and a comparison with previous data in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver transplant surgery. Anesth Analg 2011; 113:515-522.
37. Suehiro K, Tanaka K, Funao T, et al. Systemic vascular resistance has an impact on the reliability of the Vigileo-FloTrac system in measuring cardiac output and tracking cardiac output changes. Br J Anaesth 2013; 111:170-177.
38. Yamashita K, Nishiyama T, Yokoyama T, et al. The effects of vasodilation on cardiac output measured by PiCCO. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2008; 22:688-692.
39. Rex S, Schä lte G, Schroth S, et al. Limitations of arterial pulse pressure variation and left ventricular stroke volume variation in estimating cardiac preload during open heart surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2007; 51:1258-1267.
40. Mihm FG, Feeley TW, Jamieson SW. Thermal dye double indicator dilution measurement of lung water in man: comparison with gravimetric measurements. Thorax 1987; 42:72-76.
41. Jozwiak M, Silva S, Persichini R, et al. Extravascular lung water is an independent prognostic factor in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 2013; 41:472-480.
42. Sato Y, Motoyama S, Maruyama K, et al. Extravascular lung water measured using single transpulmonary thermodilution reflects perioperative pulmonary edema induced by esophagectomy. Eur Surg Res 2007; 39:7-13.
43. Oshima K, Kunimoto F, Hinohara H, et al. Evaluation of respiratory status in patients after thoracic esophagectomy using PiCCO system. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 14:283-288.
44. Michard F. Bedside assessment of extravascular lung water by dilution methods: temptations and pitfalls. Crit Care Med 2007; 35:1186-1192.
45. Haas SA, Trepte CJC, Nitzschke R, et al. An assessment of global enddiastolic volume and extravascular lung water index during one-lung ventilation: is transpulmonary thermodilution usable? Anesth Analg 2013; 117:83-90.
46. Cavallaro F, Sandroni C, Marano C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of passive leg raising for prediction of fluid responsiveness in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies. Intensive Care Med 2010; 36:1475-1483.
47. de Waal EEC, Rex S, Kruitwagen CLJJ, et al. Dynamic preload indicators fail to predict fluid responsiveness in open-chest conditions. Crit Care Med 2009; 37:510-515.