von Spiegel T, Wietasch G, Bürsch J, Hoeft A
Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie und Spezielle Intensivmedizin, Universität Bonn.
Anaesthesist. 1996 Nov;45(11):1045-50. doi: 10.1007/s001010050338.
Cardiac output measurements are often helpful in the management of critically ill patients and high risk-patients. In this study an alternative technique for measurement of cardiac output by the transpulmonary indicator dilution technique (TPID) was evaluated in comparison to conventional thermodilution using a pulmonary artery catheter. With TPID, a thermistor-tipped catheter (the smallest available is 1.3 F) is placed in the aorta via a femoral artery introducer. Thus, TPID can also be used in very small children in whom placement of a pulmonary artery catheter may be difficult or even impossible. In principle, TPID is less invasive since the possible complications of the pulmonary catheters are avoided. We investigated the accuracy and reproducibility of transpulmonary thermodilution in patients over a broad range in age and body surface.
Following approval by the ethics committee and written consent, the data were obtained from 21 patients without a circulatory shunt undergoing diagnostic heart catheterization. The patients were between 0.5 and 25.2 years old, their body surface between 0.35 and 1.89 m2. Measurements were performed in duplicate with bolus injections of ice-cold normal saline (0.15 ml/kg), randomly spread over the respiratory cycle. In total 48 thermodilution curves were measured simultaneously in the pulmonary artery and in the aorta. Thermodilution curves were monoexponentially extrapolated for elimination of recirculation and cardiac output was calculated with a standard Stewart Hamilton procedure.
The amplitude of the typical arterial thermodilution curve shows a smaller and more delayed course than the pulmonary artery thermodilution curve. There was a very good correlation between the values found by pulmonary and TPID cardiac output measurements (R = 0.968). There was a slightly smaller cardiac output value measured by the TPID (Bias = -4.7 +/- 1.5% sem) The reproducibility of duplicate measurements with the two methods were nearly the same, the standard deviation of the difference was 10.9% for the pulmonary thermodilution method and 11.7% for TPID. DISCUSSION. TPID gives an alternative technique for measurement of cardiac output. We showed over a broad range in age and body surface a very good correlation with thermodilution measurements in the pulmonary artery. The slightly smaller values for TPID are explained by early recirculation, for clinical purposes the difference is negligible. However, the reproducibility of a method is clinically very important. Both methods showed in duplicate measurements basically the same reproducibility. The disadvantage of TPID in being more sensitive to baseline alteration is counterbalanced by less respiratory variability in comparison to the conventional thermodilution technique. However, by increasing the amount of injected indicator (i.e., 0.2 ml/kg approximately equal to 15 ml in an adult) it is possible to reduce the effect of baseline alteration. By using fiberoptic catheters it is even possible to use TPID as double-indicator dilution technique to measure intrathoracic blood volume (ITBV) and extravascular lung water (EVLW). We conclude that in many patients TPID might be an attractive, less invasive and reliable alternative to conventional cardiac output measurement by pulmonary artery catheter.
心输出量测量对于危重症患者和高危患者的管理通常很有帮助。在本研究中,与使用肺动脉导管的传统热稀释法相比,评估了经肺指示剂稀释技术(TPID)测量心输出量的另一种技术。使用TPID时,将带有热敏电阻尖端的导管(最小为1.3F)通过股动脉导管鞘置入主动脉。因此,TPID也可用于非常小的儿童,在这些儿童中放置肺动脉导管可能困难甚至不可能。原则上,TPID侵入性较小,因为避免了肺动脉导管可能的并发症。我们研究了经肺热稀释法在不同年龄和体表面积患者中的准确性和可重复性。
经伦理委员会批准并获得书面同意后,从21例无循环分流且接受诊断性心导管检查的患者获取数据。患者年龄在0.5至25.2岁之间,体表面积在0.35至1.89平方米之间。通过快速注射冰冷生理盐水(0.15ml/kg)进行重复测量,随机分布在呼吸周期中。总共同时在肺动脉和主动脉中测量了48条热稀释曲线。对热稀释曲线进行单指数外推以消除再循环,并使用标准的斯图尔特·汉密尔顿程序计算心输出量。
典型的动脉热稀释曲线的幅度显示出比肺动脉热稀释曲线更小且更延迟的过程。肺动脉和TPID心输出量测量值之间存在非常好的相关性(R = 0.968)。TPID测量的心输出量值略小(偏差=-4.7±1.5%标准误)。两种方法重复测量的可重复性几乎相同,肺热稀释法差异的标准差为10.9%,TPID为11.7%。讨论。TPID提供了一种测量心输出量的替代技术。我们发现在广泛的年龄和体表面积范围内,它与肺动脉热稀释测量具有非常好的相关性。TPID值略小是由早期再循环解释的,就临床目的而言,差异可忽略不计。然而,一种方法的可重复性在临床上非常重要。两种方法在重复测量中显示出基本相同的可重复性。TPID对基线改变更敏感的缺点与传统热稀释技术相比呼吸变异性较小相抵消。然而,通过增加注射指示剂的量(即0.2ml/kg,在成人中约等于15ml),可以减少基线改变的影响。通过使用光纤导管,甚至可以将TPID用作双指示剂稀释技术来测量胸腔内血容量(ITBV)和血管外肺水(EVLW)。我们得出结论,在许多患者中,TPID可能是一种有吸引力的、侵入性较小且可靠的替代肺动脉导管测量传统心输出量的方法。