Cooper Edward S, Muir William W
College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Crit Care Med. 2007 Jul;35(7):1724-9. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000266590.25109.F2.
To determine agreement and correlation between cardiac output determined by arterial pressure waveform analysis (PulseCO) and the lithium dilution indicator technique (LiDCO) during severe hemorrhagic shock and after fluid resuscitation in dogs.
Prospective experimental study.
University research laboratory.
Twelve adult mongrel dogs.
Dogs were anesthetized, and selected arteries and veins were catheterized. Baseline cardiac output was determined by LiDCO and used to calibrate the PulseCO. Hemorrhagic shock was induced by withdrawing blood to achieve and maintain a mean arterial pressure of 30-40 mm Hg for 60 mins, and cardiac output was measured again using both methods. All dogs were resuscitated by administering lactated Ringer's solution intravenously to achieve and maintain a mean arterial pressure between 60 and 70 mm Hg. PulseCO and LiDCO values were measured at 10 and 120 mins after resuscitation.
Mean baseline cardiac output was 2.93 +/- 0.45 L/min. PulseCO values overestimated cardiac output compared with LiDCO during hemorrhagic shock (2.25 vs. 0.78 L/min). There were no differences in cardiac output determined by PulseCO and LiDCO at 10 and 120 mins after fluid resuscitation. Bland-Altman analysis suggested that PulseCO values were inaccurate after hemorrhage, producing significant bias with wide limits of agreement and percentage error (1.47 +/- 1.46 L/min; 97%). Bias was small but the limits of agreement and percentage error were large for cardiac output at 10 and 120 mins after resuscitation (-0.1 +/- 1.88 [98%] and -0.17 +/- 1.32 [71%] L/min, respectively). There appeared to be a negative but not significant correlation after hemorrhage (r = -.45; p = .15).
PulseCO determination of cardiac output does not accurately predict rapid decreases in cardiac output or the effects of fluid resuscitation in dogs. Recalibration of PulseCO may be necessary after any apparent or suspected decrease in cardiac preload, afterload, or contractility.
确定在犬严重失血性休克期间及液体复苏后,通过动脉压波形分析测定的心输出量(脉搏心输出量,PulseCO)与锂稀释指示剂技术(LiDCO)之间的一致性和相关性。
前瞻性实验研究。
大学研究实验室。
12只成年杂种犬。
对犬进行麻醉,并将选定的动脉和静脉插入导管。通过LiDCO测定基线心输出量,并用于校准PulseCO。通过抽血诱导失血性休克,使平均动脉压达到并维持在30 - 40 mmHg 60分钟,然后再次使用两种方法测量心输出量。所有犬通过静脉输注乳酸林格氏液进行复苏,使平均动脉压达到并维持在60 - 70 mmHg。在复苏后10分钟和120分钟测量PulseCO和LiDCO值。
平均基线心输出量为2.93±0.45 L/分钟。在失血性休克期间,与LiDCO相比,PulseCO值高估了心输出量(2.25对0.78 L/分钟)。在液体复苏后10分钟和120分钟,通过PulseCO和LiDCO测定的心输出量无差异。Bland-Altman分析表明,出血后PulseCO值不准确,产生显著偏差,一致性界限和百分比误差较大(1.47±1.46 L/分钟;97%)。复苏后10分钟和120分钟心输出量的偏差较小,但一致性界限和百分比误差较大(分别为-0.1±1.88[98%]和-0.17±1.32[71%]L/分钟)。出血后似乎存在负相关但不显著(r = -0.45;p = 0.15)。
PulseCO测定的心输出量不能准确预测犬心输出量的快速下降或液体复苏的效果。在任何明显或疑似心脏前负荷、后负荷或收缩力下降后,可能需要重新校准PulseCO。