首页> 外文会议>Computing in Cardiology Conference >Comparison of systolic period duration using aortic flow or pressure based methods in anesthetized patients
【24h】

Comparison of systolic period duration using aortic flow or pressure based methods in anesthetized patients

机译:用主动脉流动或压力基于麻醉患者的收缩期持续时间的比较

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

It has been shown that Systolic Period Duration (SPD) measured with trans-esophageal echocardiography (TEE) is significantly shorter compared to measurements made with radial arterial pressure waveform. This difference could be interpreted in terms of arterial pressure amplification, a mechanism by which arterial pressure waveform is transformed alongside the arterial tree. This amplification is closely related to cardiac afterload as it shares common determinants, like arterial stiffness, pulse wave velocity, or aortic reflection waves. In turn, afterload estimated partly using arterial pressure amplification is useful during general anesthesia (GA) to evaluate detrimental or beneficial effects of vasopressors given to combat hypotensions. Despite TEE measurements comport some impracticalities, trans-esophageal Doppler (TE Doppler) is routinely used for cardiac output monitoring. The goal of this paper was to compare SPD measured with TE Doppler and with arterial pressure at the same location. A secondary goal was to describe a novel dicrotic notch identification algorithm that uses the interspace between the pressure waveform and the straight line going from the systolic peak of one beat to the foot of the subsequent beat. Twenty three patients undergoing GA for neuro interventional procedures were included. Central pressure was obtained by fluid filled radiologic guidewire connected to a pressure transducer. Flow velocity waveform was obtained using TE Doppler probe inserted in the esophagus after induction of GA. Pressure and flow velocity measurements were recorded simultaneously when the tip of the pressure catheter was placed in front of the Doppler probe, in the descending Aorta. SPD measured from Flow velocity waveform was significantly shorter than from Pressure waveform (343 ± 46 ms vs 415 ± 54 ms; p <; 0.001 ). Flow velocity and Pressure waveform methods are not interchangeable. To measure SPD consistently at different locations, a consistent algorithm should be used, such as automated identification of dicrotic notch.
机译:已经表明,与用径向动脉压波形制备的测量相比,用反式食管超声心动图(TEE)测量的收缩周期持续时间(SPD)明显缩短。这种差异可以在动脉压力扩增方面解释,动脉压波形与动脉树改变的机制。该扩增与心脏后载密切相关,因为它共享共同的决定因素,如动脉刚度,脉搏波速度或主动脉反射波。反过来,部分使用动脉压力扩增的后载估计是在全身麻醉(GA)期间有用的,以评估对抗对抗反应的有害或有益效果。尽管TEE测量结果表现出一些不切实际,但常规用于心脏输出监测的反式食管多普勒(TE多普勒)。本文的目标是将使用TE多普勒测量的SPD与同一位置的动脉压进行比较。次要目标是描述一种新的Dicrotic Notch识别算法,该算法使用压力波形和直线之间的间隙,从一个节拍的收缩峰值到后续节拍的脚。包括患有Neuro介入程序的二十三名患者。通过连接到压力换能器的流体填充的放射学导丝获得中央压力。使用在诱导Ga之后插入食道中的TE多普勒探针获得流速波形。当压力导管的尖端放置在Doppler探针的前面的下降的主动脉中时,同时记录压力和流速测量。从流速波形测量的SPD显着短于压力波形(343±46ms与415±54ms; P <; 0.001)。流速和压力波形方法不可互换。为了在不同位置始终测量SPD,应使用一致的算法,例如Dicrotic Notch的自动识别。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号