首页> 外文期刊>Critical care : >Transpulmonary thermodilution using femoral indicator injection: a prospective trial in patients with a femoral and a jugular central venous catheter
【24h】

Transpulmonary thermodilution using femoral indicator injection: a prospective trial in patients with a femoral and a jugular central venous catheter

机译:股骨指示剂注射经肺热稀释:股骨颈静脉导管患者的前瞻性试验

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

IntroductionAdvanced hemodynamic monitoring using transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) is established for measurement of cardiac index (CI), global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI) and extra-vascular lung water index (EVLWI). TPTD requires indicator injection via a central venous catheter (usually placed via the jugular or subclavian vein). However, superior vena cava access is often not feasible due to the clinical situation. This study investigates the conformity of TPTD using femoral access.MethodsThis prospective study involved an 18-month trial at a medical intensive care unit at a university hospital. Twenty-four patients with both a superior and an inferior vena cava catheter at the same time were enrolled in the study.ResultsTPTD-variables were calculated from TPTD curves after injection of the indicator bolus via jugular access (TPTDjug) and femoral access (TPTDfem). GEDVIfem and GEDVIjug were significantly correlated (rm = 0.88; P < 0.001), but significantly different (1,034 ± 275 vs. 793 ± 180 mL/m2; P < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a bias of +241 mL/m2 (limits of agreement: -9 and +491 mL/m2). GEDVIfem, CIfem and ideal body weight were independently associated with the bias (GEDVIfem-GEDVIjug). A correction formula of GEDVIjug after femoral TPTD, was calculated. EVLWIfem and EVLWIjug were significantly correlated (rm = 0.93; P < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias of +0.83 mL/kg (limits of agreement: -2.61 and +4.28 mL/kg). Furthermore, CIfem and CIjug were significantly correlated (rm = 0.95; P < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a bias of +0.29 L/min/m2 (limits of agreement -0.40 and +0.97 L/min/m2; percentage-error 16%).ConclusionsTPTD after femoral injection of the thermo-bolus provides precise data on GEDVI with a high correlation, but a self-evident significant bias related to the augmented TPTD-volume. After correction of GEDVIfem using a correction formula, GEDVIfem shows high predictive capabilities for GEDVIjug. Regarding CI and EVLWI, accurate TPTD-data is obtained using femoral access.
机译:简介建立了使用经肺热稀释(TPTD)进行的高级血液动力学监测,以测量心脏指数(CI),总舒张末期容积指数(GEDVI)和血管外肺水指数(EVLWI)。 TPTD需要通过中央静脉导管(通常通过颈静脉或锁骨下静脉放置)注入指示剂。但是,由于临床情况,上腔静脉通路往往不可行。这项研究使用股骨入路调查了TPTD的符合性。方法该前瞻性研究涉及在大学医院的医疗重症监护室进行的18个月试验。本研究纳入了24例同时使用上腔静脉导管和下腔静脉导管的患者。结果TPTP变量是根据通过颈静脉入路(TPTDjug)和股骨入路(TPTDfem)注射指示剂后的TPTD曲线计算的TPTD变量。 GEDVIfem和GEDVIjug显着相关(rm = 0.88; P <0.001),但差异显着(1,034±275 vs. 793±180 mL / m2; P <0.001)。 Bland-Altman分析显示偏差为+241 mL / m2(一致极限:-9和+491 mL / m2)。 GEDVIfem,CIfem和理想体重分别与偏倚(GEDVIfem-GEDVIjug)相关。计算股骨TDTD后GEDVIjug的校正公式。 EVLWIfem和EVLWIjug显着相关(rm = 0.93; P <0.001)。 Bland-Altman分析显示偏差为+0.83 mL / kg(一致极限:-2.61和+4.28 mL / kg)。此外,CIfem和CIjug显着相关(rm = 0.95; P <0.001)。 Bland-Altman分析显示偏差为+0.29 L / min / m2(一致极限-0.40和+0.97 L / min / m2;误差百分比为16%)。结论股骨注射热推注后的TPTD可提供精确的数据。具有较高相关性的GEDVI,但与增加的TPTD量相关的不言而喻的显着偏差。使用校正公式校正GEDVIfem后,GEDVIfem对GEDVIjug具有很高的预测能力。关于CI和EVLWI,使用股骨入路可获得准确的TPTD数据。

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