Key result
Commonly monitored clinical variables (MAP, CVP, WP, Hct, and cardiac output) correlated poorly with blood volume changes and do not adequately reflect blood volume status in critically ill patients.
Why the study?
Do commonly monitored clinical variables reliably reflect blood volume status in critically ill patients?
Population
Critically ill patients of various etiologies (over 1500 instances of blood volume measurement)
Comparison
Commonly monitored clinical variables vs Blood volume measured by indicator dilution method
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Commonly monitored variables may mislead volume assessment in the ICU; this leaves open whether direct blood volume measurement improves outcomes.
Observational
Do commonly monitored clinical variables reliably reflect blood volume status in critically ill patients?
Commonly monitored hemodynamic variables such as mean arterial pressure, central venous pressure, and wedge pressure do not adequately reflect true blood volume status in critically ill patients.
Shippy et al. (1984) conducted an observational in Critical illness. Clinical monitoring variables (MAP, CVP, WP, Hct, cardiac output) vs. Blood volume measured by indicator dilution method was evaluated on Correlation between blood volume changes and monitored variables. Commonly monitored clinical variables (MAP, CVP, WP, Hct, and cardiac output) correlated poorly with blood volume changes and do not adequately reflect blood volume status in critically ill patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: