Minimally Invasive Cardiac Output Monitoring: Agreement of Oesophageal Doppler, LiDCOrapid™ and Vigileo FloTrac™ Monitors in Non-Cardiac Surgery

There is lack of data about the agreement of minimally invasive cardiac output monitors, which make it impossible to determine if they are interchangeable or differ objectively in tracking physiological trends. We studied three commonly used devices: the oesophageal Doppler and two arterial pressure–based devices, the Vigileo FloTrac™ and LiDCOrapid™. The aim of this study was to compare the agreement of these three monitors in adult patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery. Measurements were taken at baseline and after predefined clinical interventions of fluid, metaraminol or ephedrine bolus. From 24 patients, 131 events, averaging 5.2 events per patient, were analysed. The cardiac index of LiDCOrapid versus FloTrac had a mean bias of −6.0% (limits of agreement from −51% to 39%) and concordance of over 80% to the three clinical interventions. The cardiac index of Doppler versus LiDCOrapid and Doppler versus FloTrac, had an increasing negative bias at higher mean cardiac outputs and there was significantly poorer concordance to all interventions. Of the preload-responsive parameters, Doppler stroke volume index, Doppler systolic flow time and FloTrac stroke volume variation were fair at predicting fluid responsiveness while other parameters were poor. While there is reasonable agreement between the two arterial pressure–derived cardiac output devices (LiDCOrapid and Vigileo FloTrac), these two devices differ significantly to the oesophageal Doppler technology in response to common clinical intraoperative interventions, representing a limitation to how interchangeable these technologies are in measuring cardiac output.

Arterial waveform analysis

The bedside measurement of continuous arterial pressure values from waveform analysis has been routinely available via indwelling arterial catheterization for >50 years. Invasive blood pressure monitoring has been utilized in critically ill patients, in both the operating room and critical care units, to facilitate rapid diagnoses of cardiovascular insufficiency and monitor response to treatments aimed at correcting abnormalities before the consequences of either hypo- or hypertension are seen. Minimally invasive techniques to estimate cardiac output (CO) have gained increased appeal. This has led to the increased interest in arterial waveform analysis to provide this important information, as it is measured continuously in many operating rooms and intensive care units. Arterial waveform analysis also allows for the calculation of many so-called derived parameters intrinsically created by this pulse pressure profile. These include estimates of left ventricular stroke volume (SV), CO, vascular resistance, and during positive-pressure breathing, SV variation, and pulse pressure variation. This article focuses on the principles of arterial waveform analysis and their determinants, components of the arterial system, and arterial pulse contour. It will also address the advantage of measuring real-time CO by the arterial waveform and the benefits to measuring SV variation. Arterial waveform analysis has gained a large interest in the overall assessment and management of the critically ill and those at a risk of hemodynamic deterioration.