Accuracy of an autocalibrated pulse contour analysis in cardiac surgery patients: a bi-center clinical trial

Guidelines for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery. Consensus document of Spanish Societies of Anesthesia (SEDAR), Cardiovascular Surgery (SECCE) and Perfusionists (AEP)

The ERAS guidelines are intended to identify, disseminate and promote the implementation of the best, scientific evidence-based actions to decrease variability in clinical practice. The implementation of these practices in the global clinical process will promote better outcomes and the shortening of hospital and critical care unit stays, thereby resulting in a reduction in costs and in greater efficiency. After completing a systematic review at each of the points of the perioperative process in cardiac surgery, recommendations have been developed based on the best scientific evidence currently available with the consensus of the scientific societies involved.

Perioperative non-invasive versus semi-invasive cardiac index monitoring in patients with bariatric surgery - a prospective observational study

Background

In morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery, the combination of obesity-related comorbidities, pneumoperitoneum and extreme posture changes constitutes a high risk of perioperative hemodynamic complications. Thus, an advanced hemodynamic monitoring including continuous cardiac index (CI) assessment is desirable. While invasive catheterization may bear technical difficulties, transesophageal echocardiography is contraindicated due to the surgical procedure. Evidence on the clinical reliability of alternative semi- or non-invasive cardiac monitoring devices is limited. The aim was to compare the non-invasive vascular unloading to a semi-invasive pulse contour analysis reference technique for continuous CI measurements in bariatric surgical patients.

Methods

This prospective observational study included adult patients scheduled for elective, laparoscopic bariatric surgery after obtained institutional ethics approval and written informed consent. CI measurements were performed using the vascular unloading technique (Nexfin®) and semi-invasive reference method (FloTrac™). At 10 defined measurement time points, the influence of clinically indicated body posture changes, passive leg raising, fluid bolus administration and pneumoperitoneum was evaluated pre- and intraoperatively. Correlation, Bland-Altman and concordance analyses were performed.

Results

Sixty patients (mean BMI 49.2 kg/m²) were enrolled into the study and data from 54 patients could be entered in the final analysis. Baseline CI was 3.2 ± 0.9 and 3.3 ± 0.8 l/min/m², respectively. Pooled absolute CI values showed a positive correlation (r_s = 0.76, P < 0.001) and mean bias of of − 0.16 l/min/m² (limits of agreement: − 1.48 to 1.15 l/min/m²) between the two methods. Pooled percentage error was 56.51%, missing the criteria of interchangeability (< 30%). Preoperatively, bias ranged from − 0.33 to 0.08 l/min/m² with wide limits of agreement. Correlation of CI was best (r_s = 0.82, P < 0.001) and percentage error lowest (46.34%) during anesthesia and after fluid bolus administration. Intraoperatively, bias ranged from − 0.34 to − 0.03 l/min/m² with wide limits of agreement. CI measurements correlated best during pneumoperitoneum and after fluid bolus administration (r_s = 0.77, P < 0.001; percentage error 35.95%). Trending ability for all 10 measurement points showed a concordance rate of 85.12%, not reaching the predefined Critchley criterion (> 92%).

Conclusion

Non-invasive as compared to semi-invasive CI measurements did not reach criteria of interchangeability for monitoring absolute and trending values of CI in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Trial registration

The study was registered retrospectively on June 12, 2017 with the registration number NCT03184272.

Best practice & research clinical anaesthesiology: Advances in haemodynamic monitoring for the perioperative patient: Perioperative cardiac output monitoring

Less invasive or even completely non-invasive haemodynamic monitoring technologies have evolved during the last decades. Even established, invasive devices such as the pulmonary artery catheter and transpulmonary thermodilution have still an evidence-based place in the perioperative setting, albeit only in special patient populations. Accumulating evidence suggests to use continuous haemodynamic monitoring, especially flow-based variables such as stroke volume or cardiac output to prevent occult hypoperfusion and, consequently, decrease morbidity and mortality perioperatively. However, there is still a substantial gap between evidence provided by randomised trials and the implementation of haemodynamic monitoring in daily clinical routine. Given the fact that perioperative morbidity and mortality are higher than anticipated and anaesthesiologists are in charge to deal with this problem, the recent advances in minimally invasive and non-invasive monitoring technologies may facilitate more widespread use in the operating theatre, as in addition to costs, the degree of invasiveness of any monitoring tool determines the frequency of its application, at least perioperatively. This review covers the currently available invasive, non-invasive and minimally invasive techniques and devices and addresses their indications and limitations.

Validation of radial artery-based uncalibrated pulse contour method (PulsioFlex) in critically ill patients: A observational study

BACKGROUND

Because of their simplicity, uncalibrated pulse contour (UPC) methods have been introduced into clinical practice in critical care but are often validated with a femoral arterial waveform.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to test the accuracy of cardiac index (CI) measurements and trending ability from a radial artery with one UPC.

DESIGN

An observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary care mixed-surgical ICU. Data were obtained from April 2015 to July 2016.

PATIENTS

We studied 20 critically ill mechanically ventilated patients monitored by UPC (PulsioFlex; Pulsion Medical Systems SE, Feldkirchen, Germany). We used transpulmonary thermodilution (PiCCO2) as a reference.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Bland-Altman-analyses with percentage errors were calculated to assess the accuracy of CI values from radial pulse contour analysis (CIRAD), autocalibration (CIAC) and femoral pulse contour analysis (CIFEM). All were compared with a reference (CITD) at 4-h intervals for 24 h. Trending ability was assessed by polar-plots and four-quadrant-plots. CI is given in l min m.

RESULTS

Bland-Altman-analyses: for CIRAD, the mean bias was -0.1 with limits of agreement (LOA) of -2.9 to 2.7 and a percentage error of 70%; for CIAC, the mean bias was 0 with LOA -2.8 to 2.7 and a percentage error of 70%; for CIFEM, the mean bias was 0 with LOA -1.2 to 1.2 and a percentage error of 30%, respectively. Polar plots for trending: for CIRAD, the angular bias was 12° with radial LOA of 39°, a polar concordance rate of 73% and a concordance rate of 67% in the four-quadrant-plot; for CIAC, the angular bias was 4° with radial LOA of 41°, polar concordance rate of 79% and a concordance rate of 74% in the four quadrant plot; for CIFEM, the angular bias was -2° with radial LOA of 50°, polar concordance rate of 74% and a concordance rate of 81%.

CONCLUSION

In critically ill patients, the PulsioFlex system connected to a radial arterial catheter is inaccurate for CI measurements and does not track changes in CI adequately. We therefore recommend using validated thermodilution techniques for monitoring in the critical care setting.

The value of arterial pressure waveform cardiac output measurements in the radial and femoral artery in major cardiac surgery patients

Background

A relatively new uncalibrated arterial pressure waveform cardiac output (CO) measurement technique is the Pulsioflex-ProAQT® system. Aim of this study was to validate this system in cardiac surgery patients with a specific focus on the evaluation of a difference in the radial versus the femoral arterial access, the value of the auto-calibration modus and the ability to show fluid-induced changes.

Methods

In twenty-five patients scheduled for ascending aorta, aortic arch replacement, or both we measured CO simultaneously by transpulmonary thermodilution (COtd) and by using the ProAQT® system connected to the radial (COpR), as well as the femoral artery catheter (COpF). Hemodynamic data were assessed at predefined time points; from incision until 16 h after ICU admission.

Results

In total 175 (radial) and 179 (femoral) pairs of CO measurement were collected. The accuracy of COpR/COpF was evaluated showing a mean bias of −0.31 L/min (±2.9 L/min) and -0.57 L/min (± 2.8 L/min) with percentage errors of 49 and 46% respectively. Trending ability of the ProAQT® device was evaluated; the four quadrant concordance rates in the radial and femoral artery were 74 and 75% and improved to 77 and 85% after auto-calibration. The mean angular biases in the radial and femoral artery were 6.4° and 6.0° and improved to 5° and 3.3° after auto-calibration. The polar concordance rates in the radial and femoral artery were 65 and 70% and improved to 76 and 84% after auto-calibration. Considering the fluid-induced changes in stroke volume(SV), the coefficient of correlation between the changes in SVtd and SVp was 0.57 (p < 0.01) in the radial artery and 0.60 (p < 0.01) in the femoral artery.

Conclusions

The ProAQT® system can be of additional value if the clinician wants to determine fluid responsiveness in cardiac surgery patients. However, the ProAQT® system provided inaccurate CO measurements compared to transpulmonary thermodilution. The trending ability was poor for COpR but moderate for COpF. Auto-calibration of the system did not improve accuracy of CO measurements nor did it improve the prediction of fluid responsiveness. However, the trending ability was improved by auto-calibration, possibly by correcting a drift over a longer time period.

Accuracy of Cardiac Output by Nine Different Pulse Contour Algorithms in Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Comparison with Transpulmonary Thermodilution

Objective. Today, there exist several different pulse contour algorithms for calculation of cardiac output (CO). The aim of the present study was to compare the accuracy of nine different pulse contour algorithms with transpulmonary thermodilution before and after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Methods. Thirty patients scheduled for elective coronary surgery were studied before and after CPB. A passive leg raising maneuver was also performed. Measurements included CO obtained by transpulmonary thermodilution (CO_TPTD) and by nine pulse contour algorithms (CO_X1–9). Calibration of pulse contour algorithms was performed by esophageal Doppler ultrasound after induction of anesthesia and 15 min after CPB. Correlations, Bland-Altman analysis, four-quadrant, and polar analysis were also calculated. Results. There was only a poor correlation between CO_TPTD and CO_X1–9 during passive leg raising and in the period before and after CPB. Percentage error exceeded the required 30% limit. Four-quadrant and polar analysis revealed poor trending ability for most algorithms before and after CPB. The Liljestrand-Zander algorithm revealed the best reliability. Conclusions. Estimation of CO by nine different pulse contour algorithms revealed poor accuracy compared with transpulmonary thermodilution. Furthermore, the less-invasive algorithms showed an insufficient capability for trending hemodynamic changes before and after CPB. The Liljestrand-Zander algorithm demonstrated the highest reliability. This trial is registered with NCT02438228 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Monitoring high-risk patients: minimally invasive and non-invasive possibilities

Over the past decades, there has been considerable progress in the field of less invasive haemodynamic monitoring technologies. Substantial evidence has accumulated, which supports the continuous measurement and optimization of flow-based variables such as stroke volume, that is, cardiac output, in order to prevent occult hypoperfusion and consequently to improve patients' outcome in the perioperative setting. However, there is a striking gap between the developments in haemodynamic monitoring and the increasing evidence to implement defined treatment protocols based on the measured variables, and daily clinical routine. Recent trials have shown that perioperative morbidity and mortality is higher than anticipated. This emphasizes the need for the anaesthesia community to address this issue and promotes the implementation of proven concepts into clinical practice in order to improve patients' outcome, especially in high-risk patients. The advances in minimally invasive and non-invasive monitoring techniques can be seen as a driving force in this respect, as the degree of invasiveness of any monitoring tool determines the frequency of its application, especially in the operating room (OR). From this point of view, we are very confident that some of these minimally invasive and non-invasive haemodynamic monitoring technologies will become an inherent part of our monitoring armamentarium in the OR and in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Pulse waveform hemodynamic monitoring devices: recent advances and the place in goal-directed therapy in cardiac surgical patients

Hemodynamic monitoring has evolved and improved greatly during the past decades as the medical approach has shifted from a static to a functional approach. The technological advances have led to innovating calibrated or not, but minimally invasive and noninvasive devices based on arterial pressure waveform (APW) analysis. This systematic clinical review outlines the physiologic rationale behind these recent technologies. We describe the strengths and the limitations of each method in terms of accuracy and precision of measuring the flow parameters (stroke volume, cardiac output) and dynamic parameters which predict the fluid responsiveness. We also analyzed the place of the APW monitoring devices in goal-directed therapy (GDT) protocols in cardiac surgical patients. According to the data from the three GDT-randomized control trials performed in cardiac surgery (using two types of APW techniques PiCCO and FloTrac/Vigileo), these devices did not demonstrate that they played a role in decreasing mortality, but only decreasing the ventilation time and the ICU and hospital length of stay.