Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Department of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Oct 1;2(10):1090-1099. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.2945.
Thermodilution (Td) and estimated oxygen uptake Fick (eFick) methods are widely used to measure cardiac output (CO). They are often used interchangeably to make critical clinical decisions, yet few studies have compared these approaches as applied in medical practice.
To assess agreement between Td and eFick CO and to compare how well these methods predict mortality.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This investigation was a retrospective cohort study with up to 1 year of follow-up. The study used data from the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking (VA CART) program. The findings were corroborated in a cohort of patients cared for at Vanderbilt University, an academic referral center. Participants were more than 15 000 adults who underwent right heart catheterization, including 12 232 in the Veterans Affairs cohort between October 1, 2007, and September 30, 2013, and 3391 in the Vanderbilt cohort between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2014.
A single cardiac catheterization was performed on each patient with CO estimated by both Td and eFick methods. Cardiac output was indexed to body surface area (cardiac index [CI]) for all analyses.
All-cause mortality over 90 days and 1 year after catheterization.
Among 12 232 VA patients (mean [SD] age, 66.4 [9.9] years; 3.3% female) who underwent right heart catheterization in this cohort study, Td and eFick CI estimates correlated modestly (r = 0.65). There was minimal mean difference (eFick minus Td = -0.02 L/min/m2, or -0.4%) but wide 95% limits of agreement between methods (-1.3 to 1.3 L/min/m2, or -50.1% to 49.4%). Estimates differed by greater than 20% for 38.1% of patients. Low Td CI (<2.2 L/min/m2 compared with normal CI of 2.2-4.0 L/min/m2) more strongly predicted mortality than low eFick CI at 90 days (Td hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.47-1.99; χ2 = 49.5 vs eFick HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.22-1.64; χ2 = 20.7) and 1 year (Td HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.39-1.69; χ2 = 71.5 vs eFick HR, 1.35; 1.22-1.49; χ2 = 35.2). Patients with a normal CI by both methods had 12.3% 1-year mortality. There was no significant additional risk for patients with a normal Td CI but a low eFick CI (12.9%, P = .51), whereas a low Td CI but normal eFick CI was associated with higher mortality (15.4%, P = .001). The results from the Vanderbilt cohort were similar in the context of a more balanced sex distribution (46.6% female).
There is only modest agreement between Td and eFick CI estimates. Thermodilution CI better predicts mortality and should be favored over eFick in clinical practice.
热稀释法(Td)和估计摄氧量 Fick 法(eFick)广泛用于测量心输出量(CO)。它们通常可互换使用以做出关键的临床决策,但很少有研究比较这两种方法在医学实践中的应用。
评估 Td 和 eFick CO 的一致性,并比较这两种方法预测死亡率的能力。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项回顾性队列研究,最长随访时间为 1 年。研究使用了退伍军人事务部临床评估、报告和跟踪(VA CART)计划的数据。在范德比尔特大学的一个患者队列中也证实了这些发现,该队列是一个学术转诊中心。参与者为 15000 多名成年人,他们接受了右心导管检查,其中退伍军人事务队列中有 12232 人在 2007 年 10 月 1 日至 2013 年 9 月 30 日期间进行了检查,范德比尔特队列中有 3391 人在 1998 年 1 月 1 日至 2014 年 12 月 31 日期间进行了检查。
对每位患者进行单次心脏导管检查,使用 Td 和 eFick 方法估计 CO。所有分析均将 CO 索引到体表面积(心指数[CI])。
90 天和 1 年后的全因死亡率。
在这项队列研究中,退伍军人事务队列中的 12232 名患者(平均[SD]年龄,66.4[9.9]岁;3.3%为女性)接受了右心导管检查,Td 和 eFick CI 估计值中度相关(r=0.65)。方法之间的平均差异很小(eFick 减去 Td=-0.02 L/min/m2,或-0.4%),但方法之间的 95%一致性界限差异较大(-1.3 至 1.3 L/min/m2,或-50.1%至 49.4%)。对于 38.1%的患者,估计值相差超过 20%。与正常 CI(2.2-4.0 L/min/m2)相比,低 Td CI(<2.2 L/min/m2)比低 eFick CI 更能预测 90 天(Td 危险比[HR],1.71;95%CI,1.47-1.99;χ2=49.5 与 eFick HR,1.42;95%CI,1.22-1.64;χ2=20.7)和 1 年(Td HR,1.53;95%CI,1.39-1.69;χ2=71.5 与 eFick HR,1.35;95%CI,1.22-1.49;χ2=35.2)的死亡率。两种方法的 CI 均正常的患者 1 年死亡率为 12.3%。对于 Td CI 正常但 eFick CI 低的患者,没有显著的额外风险(12.9%,P=0.51),而 Td CI 低但 eFick CI 正常的患者死亡率较高(15.4%,P=0.001)。范德比尔特队列的结果在性别分布更为平衡的情况下也类似(46.6%为女性)。
Td 和 eFick CI 估计值之间仅有适度的一致性。Td CI 更好地预测死亡率,在临床实践中应优先于 eFick。