Biais Matthieu, Nouette-Gaulain Karine, Cottenceau Vincent, Vallet Alain, Cochard Jean François, Revel Philippe, Sztark François
Service d'Anesthésie Réanimation I, Hôpital Pellegrin, Place Amélie Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux Cedex, France.
Anesth Analg. 2008 May;106(5):1480-6, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e318168b309.
Cardiac output (CO) and invasive hemodynamic measurements are useful during liver transplantation. The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) is commonly used for these patients, despite the potential complications. Recently, a less invasive device (Vigileo/FloTrac) became available, which estimates CO using arterial pressure waveform analysis without external calibration. In this study, we compared CO obtained with a PAC using automatic thermodilution, instantaneous CO stat-mode (ICO(SM)), and CO obtained with the new device, arterial pressure waveform analysis (APCO) in patients undergoing liver transplantation.
Twenty sets of simultaneous measurements of APCO and ICO(SM) were determined in sedated and mechanically ventilated patients undergoing liver transplantation. Time points were as follows: after PAC insertion (T1-3), after portal clamping (T4-6), during anhepathy (T7-9), after graft reperfusion (T10-15), and in the postoperative period in the intensive care unit (T15-20).
We enrolled 20 patients and 400 measurements were obtained. No data were rejected. Bias between ICO(SM) and APCO was 0.8 L/min, 95% limits of agreement were -1.8 to 3.5 L/min. The percentage error was 43%. Bias between ICO(SM) and APCO was correlated with systemic vascular resistance [r(2) = 0.55, P < 0.0001, y = 15.8-2.2 ln(x)] and subgroup analysis revealed an increase in the bias and in the percentage error in patients with low systemic vascular resistance (Child-Pugh grade B and C patients). There was no difference between the different surgical periods.
Our results suggest that Vigileo/FloTrac CO monitoring data do not agree well with those of automatic thermodilution in patients undergoing liver transplantation, especially in Child-Pugh grade B and C patients with low systemic vascular resistance.
心输出量(CO)和有创血流动力学测量在肝移植过程中很有用。尽管存在潜在并发症,但肺动脉导管(PAC)常用于这些患者。最近,一种侵入性较小的设备(Vigileo/FloTrac)问世,它通过动脉压力波形分析来估计CO,无需外部校准。在本研究中,我们比较了肝移植患者中使用自动热稀释法通过PAC获得的CO、瞬时CO静态模式(ICO(SM))以及使用新设备通过动脉压力波形分析(APCO)获得的CO。
对20例接受肝移植的镇静且机械通气患者进行了20组APCO和ICO(SM)的同步测量。时间点如下:PAC插入后(T1 - 3)、门静脉阻断后(T4 - 6)、麻醉期间(T7 - 9)、移植肝再灌注后(T10 - 15)以及重症监护病房术后期间(T15 - 20)。
我们纳入了20例患者,共获得400次测量数据。无数据被排除。ICO(SM)与APCO之间的偏差为0.8升/分钟,95%一致性界限为 - 1.8至3.5升/分钟。百分比误差为43%。ICO(SM)与APCO之间的偏差与全身血管阻力相关[r(2) = 0.55,P < 0.0001,y = 15.8 - 2.2 ln(x)],亚组分析显示全身血管阻力低的患者(Child - Pugh B级和C级患者)偏差和百分比误差增加。不同手术阶段之间无差异。
我们的结果表明,在肝移植患者中,Vigileo/FloTrac CO监测数据与自动热稀释法的数据一致性不佳,尤其是在全身血管阻力低的Child - Pugh B级和C级患者中。