Back to Search Start Over

Clinical validation of a computerized algorithm to determine mean systemic filling pressure

Authors :
Alexander J. G. H. Bindels
Joris van Houte
Jan Bakker
Loek P.B. Meijs
Arthur Bouwman
Bente C. M. Conjaerts
Saskia Houterman
Intensive Care
MUMC+: MA AIOS Anesthesiologie (9)
RS: FHML non-thematic output
Signal Processing Systems
Eindhoven MedTech Innovation Center
Electrical Engineering
Biomedical Diagnostics Lab
Source :
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, 36(1), 191-198. Springer Netherlands, Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, 36(1), 191-198. Springer, Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
Publication Year :
2022
Publisher :
Springer, 2022.

Abstract

Mean systemic filling pressure (Pms) is a promising parameter in determining intravascular fluid status. Pms derived from venous return curves during inspiratory holds with incremental airway pressures (Pms-Insp) estimates Pms reliably but is labor-intensive. A computerized algorithm to calculate Pms (Pmsa) at the bedside has been proposed. In previous studies Pmsa and Pms-Insp correlated well but with considerable bias. This observational study was performed to validate Pmsa with Pms-Insp in cardiac surgery patients. Cardiac output, right atrial pressure and mean arterial pressure were prospectively recorded to calculate Pmsa using a bedside monitor. Pms-Insp was calculated offline after performing inspiratory holds. Intraclass-correlation coefficient (ICC) and assessment of agreement were used to compare Pmsa with Pms-Insp. Bias, coefficient of variance (COV), precision and limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. Proportional bias was assessed with linear regression. A high degree of inter-method reliability was found between Pmsa and Pms-Insp (ICC 0.89; 95%CI 0.72–0.96, p = 0.01) in 18 patients. Pmsa and Pms-Insp differed not significantly (11.9 mmHg, IQR 9.8–13.4 vs. 12.7 mmHg, IQR 10.5–14.4, p = 0.38). Bias was −0.502 ± 1.90 mmHg (p = 0.277). COV was 4% with LOA –4.22 − 3.22 mmHg without proportional bias. Conversion coefficient Pmsa ➔ Pms-Insp was 0.94. This assessment of agreement demonstrates that the measures Pms-Insp and the computerized Pmsa-algorithm are interchangeable (bias −0.502 ± 1.90 mmHg with conversion coefficient 0.94). The choice of Pmsa is straightforward, it is non-interventional and available continuously at the bedside in contrast to Pms-Insp which is interventional and calculated off-line. Further studies should be performed to determine the place of Pmsa in the circulatory management of critically ill patients. (www.clinicaltrials.gov; TRN NCT04202432, release date 16-12-2019; retrospectively registered).Clinical Trial Registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov, TRN: NCT04202432, initial release date 16-12-2019 (retrospectively registered).

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
13871307
Volume :
36
Issue :
1
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....1bf7d3ede540cca592227997de8f69b4