Hemodynamic monitoring: To calibrate or not to calibrate? Part 2--Non-calibrated techniques

Reliability of Bioreactance and Pulse-Power Analysis in Measuring Cardiac Index During Open Abdominal Aortic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the accuracy, precision, and trending ability of noninvasive bioreactance-based Starling SV and the mini invasive pulse-power device LiDCOrapid as compared to thermodilution cardiac output (TDCO) as measured by pulmonary artery catheter when assessing cardiac index (CIx) in the setting of elective open abdominal aortic (AA) surgery.

DESIGN

A prospective method-comparison study.

SETTING

Oulu University Hospital, Finland.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty patients undergoing elective open abdominal aortic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Intraoperative CI measurements were obtained simultaneously with TDCO and the study monitors, resulting in 627 measurement pairs with Starling SV and 497 with LiDCOrapid.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The Bland-Altman method was used to investigate the agreement among the devices, and four-quadrant plots with error grids were used to assess trending ability. The agreement between TDCO and Starling SV was associated with a bias of 0.18 L/min/m2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.13 to 0.23), wide limits of agreement (LOA = -1.12 to 1.47 L/min/m2), and a percentage error (PE) of 63.7 (95% CI = 52.4-71.0). The agreement between TDCO and LiDCOrapid was associated with a bias of -0.15 L/min/m2 (95% CI = -0.21 to -0.09), wide LOA (-1.56 to 1.37), and a PE of 68.7 (95% CI = 54.9-79.6). The trending ability of neither device was sufficient.

CONCLUSION

The CI measurements achieved with Starling SV and LiDCOrapid were not interchangeable with TDCO, and the ability to track changes in CI was poor. These results do not support the use of either study device in monitoring CI during open AA surgery.

Reliability of bioreactance and pulse power analysis in measuring cardiac index during cytoreductive abdominal surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)

PURPOSE

Various malignancies with peritoneal carcinomatosis are treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The hemodynamic instability resulting from fluid balance alterations during the procedure necessitates reliable hemodynamic monitoring. The aim of the study was to compare the accuracy, precision and trending ability of two less invasive hemodynamic monitors, bioreactance-based Starling SV and pulse power device LiDCOrapid with bolus thermodilution technique with pulmonary artery catheter in the setting of cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients scheduled for cytoreductive surgery were recruited. Twenty-three of them proceeded to HIPEC and were included to the study. Altogether 439 and 430 intraoperative bolus thermodilution injections were compared to simultaneous cardiac index readings obtained with Starling SV and LiDCOrapid, respectively. Bland-Altman method, four-quadrant plots and error grids were used to assess the agreement of the devices.

RESULTS

Comparing Starling SV with bolus thermodilution, the bias was acceptable (0.13 l min^- 1 m^- 2, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20), but the limits of agreement were wide (- 1.55 to 1.71 l min^- 1 m^- 2) and the percentage error was high (60.0%). Comparing LiDCOrapid with bolus thermodilution, the bias was acceptable (- 0.26 l min^- 1 m^- 2, 95% CI - 0.34 to - 0.18), but the limits of agreement were wide (- 1.99 to 1.39 l min^- 1 m^- 2) and the percentage error was high (57.1%). Trending ability was inadequate with both devices.

CONCLUSION

Starling SV and LiDCOrapid were not interchangeable with bolus thermodilution technique limiting their usefulness in the setting of cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC.

Extravascular lung water levels are associated with mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The prognostic value of extravascular lung water (EVLW) measured by transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) in critically ill patients is debated. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing the effects of TPTD-estimated EVLW on mortality in critically ill patients.

Methods

Cohort studies published in English from Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1960 to 1 June 2021 were systematically searched. From eligible studies, the values of the odds ratio (OR) of EVLW as a risk factor for mortality, and the value of EVLW in survivors and non-survivors were extracted. Pooled OR were calculated from available studies. Mean differences and standard deviation of the EVLW between survivors and non-survivors were calculated. A random effects model was computed on the weighted mean differences across the two groups to estimate the pooled size effect. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the possible sources of heterogeneity.

Results

Of the 18 studies included (1296 patients), OR could be extracted from 11 studies including 905 patients (464 survivors vs. 441 non-survivors), and 17 studies reported EVLW values of survivors and non-survivors, including 1246 patients (680 survivors vs. 566 non-survivors). The pooled OR of EVLW for mortality from eleven studies was 1.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) [1.22; 2.34], p < 0.0015). EVLW was significantly lower in survivors than non-survivors, with a mean difference of −4.97 mL/kg (95% CI [−6.54; −3.41], p < 0.001). The results regarding OR and mean differences were consistent in subgroup analyses.

Conclusions

The value of EVLW measured by TPTD is associated with mortality in critically ill patients and is significantly higher in non-survivors than in survivors. This finding may also be interpreted as an indirect confirmation of the reliability of TPTD for estimating EVLW at the bedside. Nevertheless, our results should be considered cautiously due to the high risk of bias of many studies included in the meta-analysis and the low rating of certainty of evidence.

Trial registration the study protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO: CRD42019126985.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04061-6.

Optimization of the target strategy of perioperative infusion therapy based on monitoring data of central hemodynamics in order to prevent complications

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are increasingly used in the perioperative period around the world. The concept of goal-directed fluid therapy (GDT) is a key element of the ERAS protocols. Inadequate perioperative infusion therapy can lead to a number of complications, including the development of an infectious process, namely surgical site infections, pneumonia, urinary tract infections. Optimal infusion therapy is difficult to achieve with standard parameters (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure, central venous pressure), so there are various methods of monitoring central hemodynamics - from invasive, minimally invasive to non-invasive. The latter are increasingly used in clinical practice. The current evidence base shows that perioperative management, specifically the use of GDT guided by real-time, continuous hemodynamic monitoring, helps clinicians maintain a patient's optimal fluid balance. The manuscript presents the analytical data, which describe the benefits and basic principles of perioperative targeted infusion therapy based on central hemodynamic parameters to reduce the risk of complications.

Reliability of Bioreactance and Pulse-Power Analysis in Measuring Cardiac Index in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery With Cardiopulmonary Bypass

OBJECTIVES

Less-invasive and continuous cardiac output monitors recently have been developed to monitor patient hemodynamics. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy, precision, and trending ability of noninvasive bioreactance-based Starling SV and miniinvasive pulse-power device LiDCOrapid to bolus thermodilution technique with a pulmonary artery catheter (TDCO) when measuring cardiac index in the setting of cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB).

DESIGN

A prospective method-comparison study.

SETTING

Oulu University Hospital, Finland.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB.

INTERVENTIONS

Cardiac index measurements were obtained simultaneously with TDCO intraoperatively and postoperatively, resulting in 498 measurements with Starling SV and 444 with LiDCOrapid.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The authors used the Bland-Altman method to investigate the agreement between the devices and four-quadrant plots with error grids to assess the trending ability. The agreement between TDCO and Starling SV was qualified with a bias of 0.43 L/min/m² (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.50), wide limits of agreement (LOA, -1.07 to 1.94 L/min/m²), and a percentage error (PE) of 66.3%. The agreement between TDCO and LiDCOrapid was qualified, with a bias of 0.22 L/min/m² (95% CI 0.16-0.27), wide LOA (-0.93 to 1.43), and a PE of 53.2%. With both devices, trending ability was insufficient.

CONCLUSION

The reliability of bioreactance-based Starling SV and pulse-power analyzer LiDCOrapid was not interchangeable with TDCO, thus limiting their usefulness in cardiac surgery with CPB.

Bioreactance and fourth-generation pulse contour methods in monitoring cardiac index during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) is considered the gold standard for cardiac index monitoring. Recently new and less invasive methods to assess cardiac performance have been developed. The aim of our study was to assess the reliability of a non-invasive monitor utilizing bioreactance (Starling SV) and a non-calibrated mini-invasive pulse contour device (FloTrac/EV1000, fourth-generation software) compared to bolus thermodilution technique with PAC (TDCO) during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (OPCAB). In this prospective study, 579 simultaneous intra- and postoperative cardiac index measurements obtained with Starling SV, FloTrac/EV1000 and TDCO were compared in 20 patients undergoing OPCAB. The agreement of data was investigated by Bland-Altman plots, while trending ability was assessed by four-quadrant plots with error grids. In comparison with TDCO, Starling SV was associated with a bias of 0.13 L min^-1 m^-2 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.18), wide limits of agreement (LOA, - 1.23 to 1.51 L min^-1 m^-2), a percentage error (PE) of 60.7%, and poor trending ability. In comparison with TDCO, FloTrac was associated with a bias of 0.01 L min^-1 m^-2 (95% CI - 0.05 to 0.06), wide LOA (- 1.27 to 1.29 L min^-1 m^-2), a PE of 56.8% and poor trending ability. Both Starling SV and fourth-generation FloTrac showed acceptable mean bias but imprecision due to wide LOA and high PE, and poor trending ability. These findings indicate limited reliability in monitoring cardiac index in patients undergoing OPCAB.

Noninvasive oscillometric cardiac output determination in the intensive care unit - comparison with invasive transpulmonary thermodilution

Assessment of the cardiac output (CO) is usually performed with invasive techniques requiring specialized equipment in the intensive care unit (ICU). With TEL-O-GRAPH (TG), CO can be derived from the oscillometrically obtained brachial pulse wave during the measurement of brachial blood pressure. CO and stroke volume (SV) determinations with TG were compared with transpulmonary thermodilution measurements with the PICCO system (PICCO) in 38 haemodynamically unstable ICU patients with a total of 84 comparison measurements performed. SV (33.3 ± 9.0 ml/m² vs. 44.3 ± 14.4 ml/m², p < 0.001) and CO (2.7 ± 0.5 l/min/m² vs. 3.8 ± 1.2 l/min/m², p < 0.001) were underestimated significantly with TG and oscillometric brachial systolic blood pressure (BP) was significantly lower and diastolic BP significantly higher than invasive femoral artery pressure. A linear correlation was found between CO dimension and CO underestimation with TG. Correct tracking of CO changes with a fluid challenge was possible in 69.5% of measurements. Oscillometric noninvasive CO is possible in the ICU, but accuracy and precision of this new method are lacking. Implementation of a correction factor accounting for the linear increase in CO underestimation observed with increasing CO could improve CO assessment with TG in haemodynamically unstable patients.

Strategies for Intravenous Fluid Resuscitation in Trauma Patients

Intravenous fluid management of trauma patients is fraught with complex decisions that are often complicated by coagulopathy and blood loss. This review discusses the fluid management in trauma patients from the perspective of the developing world. In addition, the article describes an approach to specific circumstances in trauma fluid decision-making and provides recommendations for the resource-limited environment.