Kim Justin S, Ivanovic Sasa, Davison Danielle, Bheem Rishika, Wu Maria, Sweeney Brendan, Shaykhinurov Eduard, Yamane David
Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, & Sleep Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
J Intensive Care Med. 2025 Jan;40(1):47-53. doi: 10.1177/08850666241265190. Epub 2024 Jul 23.
Central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) obtained from a central venous catheter (CVC) is often used to approximate oxygen delivery in critically ill patients. Despite their importance in administering medications and monitoring oxygen delivery, the use of CVCs can be associated with significant complications. Midline catheters are inserted via a peripheral vein above the antecubital fossa and provide a safe alternative to CVCs. This study aimed to determine the equivalence of ScvO2 and midline catheter oxygen saturation (SmO2) in critically ill patients.
This was a single-center observational study of critically ill adult patients who had concurrently placed CVCs (internal jugular and subclavian) and midline catheters as part of standard ICU care. Venous oxygen saturation and lactate levels were measured from both catheters using the Abbott point-of-care i-STAT analyzer. Demographic and ICU admission data were collected. Continuous variables were compared using the paired t-test. Pearson's correlation was used to evaluate the linear correlation between ScvO2 and SmO2. The systematic error (bias) was calculated using Bland-Altman analysis. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to evaluate the sensitivities and specificities for different values of SmO2 to predict ScvO2.
Forty-eight patients (n = 48) were enrolled in the study. The mean ScvO2 and SmO2 were 65.5% +/- 11.2% and 62.7% +/- 17.6% respectively (p = 0.1197). In the Bland-Altman analysis, the mean bias between ScvO2 and SmO2 was 2.8% +/- 12.3% with 95% limits of agreement of -21.3% to 26.9%. More than 60% of the ScvO2 and SmO2 values diverged by ≥ 5%.
The difference between the mean SmO2 and ScvO2 was not statistically significant and the mean bias between SmO2 and ScvO2 is low. Despite this, the substantially large standard deviation and limits of agreement preclude the use of SmO2 as a direct surrogate of ScvO2.
通过中心静脉导管(CVC)获得的中心静脉血氧饱和度(ScvO2)常用于估算重症患者的氧输送情况。尽管CVC在给药和监测氧输送方面很重要,但使用CVC可能会引发严重并发症。中线导管经肘前窝上方的外周静脉插入,是CVC的一种安全替代方案。本研究旨在确定重症患者中ScvO2与中线导管血氧饱和度(SmO2)的等效性。
这是一项针对成年重症患者的单中心观察性研究,这些患者作为标准ICU护理的一部分,同时置入了CVC(颈内静脉和锁骨下静脉)和中线导管。使用雅培即时i-STAT分析仪测量两根导管的静脉血氧饱和度和乳酸水平。收集人口统计学和ICU入院数据。连续变量采用配对t检验进行比较。采用Pearson相关性分析评估ScvO2与SmO2之间的线性相关性。使用Bland-Altman分析计算系统误差(偏差)。构建受试者工作特征曲线以评估不同SmO2值预测ScvO2的敏感性和特异性。
48例患者纳入本研究。ScvO2和SmO2的平均值分别为65.5%±11.2%和62.7%±17.6%(p = 0.1197)。在Bland-Altman分析中,ScvO2与SmO2之间的平均偏差为2.8%±12.3%,95%一致性界限为-21.3%至26.9%。超过60%的ScvO2和SmO2值相差≥5%。
SmO2与ScvO2的平均值差异无统计学意义,且SmO2与ScvO2之间的平均偏差较小。尽管如此,标准差和一致性界限过大,使得SmO2无法直接替代ScvO2。