Marks C, Katch V, Rocchini A, Beekman R, Rosenthal A
Sports Med. 1985 Nov-Dec;2(6):432-46. doi: 10.2165/00007256-198502060-00004.
This article reviews the available literature on the validity and reliability of the non-invasive techniques, commonly known as CO2 rebreathing, for estimating cardiac output. The differing indirect methodologies are described and illustrated. A table, constructed from the available literature, comparing criterion versus estimated cardiac outputs is presented. The varying combinations of methods employed, differing measurement conditions, i.e. rest and exercise, and divergent populations are illustrated and discussed. The correlation between criterion and estimated cardiac output for these studies ranged from r = 0.09 to 0.96, with a % standard deviation of the differences of 1.5 to 176.8%. The Collier and end-tidal methods, in conjunction with either the Comroe or McHardy CO2 dissociation curve appears to be the most established, valid and reliable combination of methods for estimating resting cardiac output. These methods appear to be comparable to the combination of the Defares, end-tidal and Comroe curve methods for estimating cardiac output during exercise. Because of the potential for large errors, caution is urged when interpreting cardiac output results based on indirect estimation for individual assessment, or for subjects with certain types of pulmonary or heart diseases.
本文综述了关于非侵入性技术（通常称为二氧化碳重呼吸法）在估计心输出量方面的有效性和可靠性的现有文献。描述并举例说明了不同的间接方法。给出了一个根据现有文献构建的表格，比较了标准心输出量与估计心输出量。阐述并讨论了所采用方法的不同组合、不同的测量条件（即静息和运动状态）以及不同的人群。这些研究中标准心输出量与估计心输出量之间的相关性范围为r = 0.09至0.96，差异的百分比标准差为1.5%至176.8%。科利尔法和潮气末法，结合康罗伊或麦克哈迪二氧化碳解离曲线，似乎是估计静息心输出量最成熟、有效和可靠的方法组合。这些方法在估计运动时的心输出量方面似乎与德法雷斯法、潮气末法和康罗伊曲线法的组合相当。由于存在较大误差的可能性，在基于间接估计来解释个体评估或患有某些类型肺部或心脏疾病的受试者的心输出量结果时，需谨慎行事。
