Back to Search
Start Over
Comparison of Accuracy of Estimation of Cardiac Output by Thermodilution Versus the Fick Method Using Measured Oxygen Uptake.
- Source :
-
The American journal of cardiology [Am J Cardiol] 2022 Aug 01; Vol. 176, pp. 58-65. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 May 22. - Publication Year :
- 2022
-
Abstract
- The thermodilution (TD) method is routinely used for the estimation of cardiac output (Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> ). However, its accuracy, compared with the gold-standard Fick method, where systemic oxygen uptake (V̇O <subscript>2</subscript> ) is directly measured, and Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> calculated from V̇O <subscript>2</subscript> and the arterio-venous oxygen difference ("direct" Fick), has not been well validated. The present study determined the agreement between TD and Fick methods in consecutive patients who underwent pulmonary artery catheterization for a broad range of clinical conditions. This is a subanalysis of a previous study comparing the indirect versus Fick method based on a prospective, consecutive patient registry of 253 patients who underwent pulmonary artery catheterization for clinical indications at a single center between 1999 and 2005. We included patients that had an estimation of Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> both by the Fick method using measured V̇O <subscript>2</subscript> by exhaled gas analyses from timed Douglas bag collections and by TD. Cardiac index was classified as low when ≤2.2 L/min/m <superscript>2</superscript> or normal when >2.2 L/min/m <superscript>2</superscript> . The median (25th, 75th percentile) age of the cohort was 59 (50,67) years, and 50% were female. A total of 43.5% had normal left ventricular function by ventriculography, and 25.7% had ischemic heart disease. Median overall Fick and TD Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> were 4.4 (3.5, 5.5) and 4.3 (3.7, 5.2) L/min, respectively (p = 0.04). The median absolute percent error between Fick and TD Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> was 17.5 (7.7, 28.4)%, with a typical error of 0.88 L/min (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82 to 0.95). Median absolute percent error was comparable in the low (n = 118) and normal Q̇ <subscript>CI</subscript> (n = 135) groups (16.9% vs 18.9%, respectively, p = 0.88). typical error was 0.3 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.33) and 0.49 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.55) L/min/m <superscript>2</superscript> in that comparison. Percent error >25% between Fick and TD Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> was observed in over 30% of patients. Overall, Fick and TD Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> modestly correlated (R <subscript>s</subscript>  = 0.64, p <0.001), with a nondirectional error introduced by TD Q̇ <subscript>C</subscript> [mean bias of 0.21 (-2.2, 2.7) L/min]. There was poor agreement between TD and the gold-standard Fick method, highlighting the limitations of making clinical decisions based on TD.<br /> (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1879-1913
- Volume :
- 176
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- The American journal of cardiology
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 35613956
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.04.026