Suppr超能文献

[A comparison of two methods for continuous cardiac output measurement: PulseCO VS CCO].

作者信息

Tsutsui Masato, Mori Tomohisa, Aramaki Yoshihiko, Fukuda Isao, Kazama Tomiei

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa 359-8513.

出版信息

Masui. 2004 Aug;53(8):929-33.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

PulseCO (PulseCO) (PulseCO Hemodynamic Monitor, LiDCO Co., London, England) is a low invasive apparatus to measure cardiac output continuously from arterial pulse waveform. CCO (774 HF 75, Edwards Lifescience Co., California, USA) is a continuous cardiac monitor commonly used clinically. The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of these two methods for cardiac output measurement with the thermodilution technique (TDCO) as control.

METHODS

To compare the accuracy of PulseCO with that of CCO, six patients with pulmonary-artery catheter inserted were recruited. PulseCO and CCO were measured continuously, and these CO values were compared with TDCO measurements every hour.

RESULTS

Correlation with TDCO was examined in PulseCO (r=0.82) and CCO (r=0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

PulseCO was low invasive, and showed a significantly better correlation with TDCO, compared with CCO.

摘要

相似文献

4
[Comparison between continuous and intermittent thermodilution measurement of cardiac output during coronary artery bypass operation].
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 1997 Apr;32(4):226-33. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-995042.
10
Arterial pulse wave analysis: An accurate means of determining cardiac output in children.
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2006 Nov;7(6):532-5. doi: 10.1097/01.PCC.0000243723.47105.A2.

引用本文的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验