Suppr超能文献

体外循环前后使用第四版FloTrac系统测量心输出量的评估。

Evaluation of the use of the fourth version FloTrac system in cardiac output measurement before and after cardiopulmonary bypass.

作者信息

Lin Sheng-Yi, Chou An-Hsun, Tsai Yung-Fong, Chang Su-Wei, Yang Min-Wen, Ting Pei-Chi, Chen Chun-Yu

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Medical Center, No.5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist., Taoyuan, 333, Taiwan.

Graduate Institute of Clinical Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, 333, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Clin Monit Comput. 2018 Oct;32(5):807-815. doi: 10.1007/s10877-017-0071-6. Epub 2017 Oct 16.

Abstract

The FloTrac system is a system for cardiac output (CO) measurement that is less invasive than the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC). The purposes of this study were to (1) compare the level of agreement and trending abilities of CO values measured using the fourth version of the FloTrac system (CCO-FloTrac) and PAC-originated continuous thermodilution (CCO-PAC) and (2) analyze the inadequate CO-discriminating ability of the FloTrac system before and after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Fifty patients were included. After exclusion, 32 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB were analyzed. All patients were monitored with a PAC and radial artery catheter connected to the FloTrac system. CO was assessed at 10 timing points during the surgery. In the Bland-Altman analysis, the percentage errors (bias, the limits of agreement) of the CCO-FloTrac were 61.82% (0.16, - 2.15 to 2.47 L min) and 51.80% (0.48, - 1.97 to 2.94 L min) before and after CPB, respectively, compared with CCO-PAC. The concordance rates in the four-quadrant plot were 64.10 and 62.16% and the angular concordance rates (angular mean bias, the radial limits of agreement) in the polar-plot analysis were 30.00% (17.62°, - 70.69° to 105.93°) and 38.63% (- 10.04°, - 96.73° to 76.30°) before and after CPB, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for CCO-FloTrac was 0.56, 0.52, 0.52, and 0.72 for all, ≥ ± 5, ≥ ± 10, and ≥ ± 15% CO changes (ΔCO) of CCO-PAC before CPB, respectively, and 0.59, 0.55, 0.49, and 0.46 for all, ≥ ± 5, ≥ ± 10, and ≥ ± 15% ΔCO of CCO-PAC after CPB, respectively. When CO < 4 L/min was considered inadequate, the Cohen κ coefficient was 0.355 and 0.373 before and after CPB, respectively. The accuracy, trending ability, and inadequate CO-discriminating ability of the fourth version of the FloTrac system in CO monitoring are not statistically acceptable in cardiac surgery.

摘要

FloTrac系统是一种用于测量心输出量(CO)的系统,其侵入性低于肺动脉导管(PAC)。本研究的目的是:(1)比较使用FloTrac系统第四版(CCO-FloTrac)和源自PAC的连续热稀释法(CCO-PAC)测量的CO值的一致性水平和趋势分析能力;(2)分析体外循环(CPB)前后FloTrac系统辨别CO不足的能力。纳入了50例患者。排除后,对32例行CPB心脏手术的患者进行分析。所有患者均通过连接到FloTrac系统的PAC和桡动脉导管进行监测。在手术期间的10个时间点评估CO。在Bland-Altman分析中,与CCO-PAC相比,CCO-FloTrac在CPB前后的百分比误差(偏差、一致性界限)分别为61.82%(0.16,-2.15至2.47L/min)和51.80%(0.48,-1.97至2.94L/min)。四象限图中的一致性率分别为64.10%和6​2.16%,极坐标图分析中的角度一致性率(角度平均偏差、径向一致性界限)在CPB前后分别为30.00%(17.62°,-70.69°至105.93°)和38.63%(-10.04°,-96.73°至76.30°)。对于CPB前CCO-PAC的所有、≥±5%、≥±10%和≥±15%的心输出量变化(ΔCO),CCO-FloTrac的受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.56、0.52、0.52和0.72,对于CPB后CCO-PAC的所有、≥±5%、≥±10%和≥±15%的ΔCO,其受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.59、0.55、0.49和0.46。当CO<4L/min被认为不足时,Cohen κ系数在CPB前后分别为0.355和0.373。FloTrac系统第四版在心脏手术中监测CO时的准确性、趋势分析能力和辨别CO不足的能力在统计学上不被接受。

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