Key result
Noninvasive resuscitation techniques and continuous cardiac output monitoring offer dynamic methods to assess fluid responsiveness and hemodynamics in critically ill patients.
Why the study?
Do noninvasive hemodynamic monitors accurately assess fluid responsiveness and cardiac output compared to invasive catheterization in critically ill patients?
Population
Critically ill patients requiring hemodynamic monitoring and fluid resuscitation
Comparison
Noninvasive hemodynamic monitors vs Invasive measurement with radial and pulmonary…
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring may aid fluid assessment in critical care; leaves open accuracy versus invasive standards pending prospective trials.
Do noninvasive hemodynamic monitors accurately assess fluid responsiveness and cardiac output compared to invasive catheterization in critically ill patients?
Noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring technologies provide a dynamic and potentially safer alternative to invasive catheterization for assessing fluid responsiveness and cardiac output in critically ill patients.
Anthony M. Napoli (2011) conducted a review in Critically ill patients requiring hemodynamic monitoring. Noninvasive resuscitation techniques and cardiac output monitoring vs. Invasive measurement (radial and pulmonary artery catheterization) was evaluated. Noninvasive resuscitation techniques and continuous cardiac output monitoring offer dynamic methods to assess fluid responsiveness and hemodynamics in critically ill patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: