Comparison of Impedance Cardiography and Bolus Thermodilution Method in Mechanically
Ventilated Patients Requiring Haemodynamic Support: a Prospective Study
Černý V.1, 2, Djurberg H.1, Tjan D.1, Jacobs, S.1
1Riyadh Armed Forces Hospital, Dept. of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Director: Hans Djurberg, MD2Klinika anesteziologie, resuscitace a intenzivní medicíny, Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Lékařská fakulta v Hradci Králové, Fakultní nemocnice Hradec Králové, přednosta doc. MUDr. Vladimír Černý, Ph.D., FCCM |
|
Summary:
Objective: Bolus thermodilution (BTD) is the most commonly used bedside method of a cardiac output measurement in
critically ill patients. A noninvasive alternative method for determining cardiac output and selected derived variables is that
of impedance cardiography (ICG), however, conficting results in the literature regarding degree of agreement between BTD
and ICG have been published in the literature so far. The aim of the study was to assess the degree of correlation and
agreement between cardiac output by impedance cardiography and thermodilution method and to evaluate the relationship
between selected variables derived from ICG and those derived from standard hemodynamic measurement.
Design: Prospective study.
Setting: General intensive care unit at tertiary referral hospital.
Material and Methods: A prospective 2 months study in patients requiring ventilatory and hemodynamic support was
conducted. All patients requiring pulmonary artery catheter on clinical grounds during a study period were included and
simultaneous cardiac output measurements by BTD and ICG (BioZ ICG Monitor, CardioDynamics) were performed at least
every four hours. Patients demographic data, cardiac index (CI), central venous pressure (CVP), wedge pressure (PCWP),
total chest fluid content (TFC) derived from ICG and paO2/FiO2 index were recorded or calculated. Data are expressed as
mean ± SD and were analyzed by SPSS 9.0 and MedCalc 7. The following statistical analyses were performed: Pearson
correlation, regression analysis and Bland Altman analysis for bias and precision.
Results: A total of 100 paired data points from 12 patients (9 male, 3 female) during a study period were collected.The range
of CI (L/min/m2) measurements was 0.5–5.3 by the ICG (mean 2.33 ± 0.8) and 2–6.5 by BTD (mean 3.67 ± 1.08), the correlation
coefficient between BTD and ICG was r = 0.268, the bias was -1.3 (95% CI -3.6 to 0.9 L/min/m2) and SD of the differences was
1.16 L/min/m2. The correlation coefficients between TFC and CVP, PCWP and paO2/FiO2 were -0.13; resp. -0.37; resp. -0.53.
Conclusion: The ICG showed poor correlation and agreement with the BTD method in mechanically ventilated patients
requiring hemodynamic support. Factors that can explain our findings may be the differences between populations usedfor calibration of ICG and the study population, the influence of changing peripheral perfusion due to vasopressor therapy
and tissue edema on the bioimpedance signal. There was significant correlation between TFC and paO2/FiO2. The obtained
results cannot support the routine use of ICG to replace BTD in this population of patients.
Key words:
intensive care – cardiac output – thermodilution – impedance cardiography – thoracic bioelectrial impedance
|