Why the study?
Pulmonary arterial catheterization for cardiac index is limited by complications and low cost-effectiveness, prompting noninvasive alternatives that require accuracy validation.
Does noninvasive cardiac index measurement using Mobil-O-Graph NG provide clinically acceptable agreement with FloTrac/Vigileo in patients undergoing general anesthesia?
Does noninvasive cardiac index measurement using Mobil-O-Graph NG provide clinically acceptable agreement with FloTrac/Vigileo in patients undergoing general anesthesia?
The Mobil-O-Graph NG noninvasive cardiac index measurement showed a percentage error of 32.4% compared to FloTrac/Vigileo, failing to meet the <30% criterion for clinical interchangeability.
Objective: Although the reference value of cardiac index (CI) is derived by pulmonary arterial pressure, the use of pulmonary arterial catheterization is limited by low cost effectiveness and many concerns regarding complications. Therefore, relatively noninvasive indirect measurement is used widely perioperatively. The goal of this study was to determine the accuracy of the CI derived by Mobil-O-Graph NG (cCI) noninvasively in patients undergoing general anesthesia by comparing that measured by FloTrac/Vigileo (fCI), the minimal invasive method. Methods: The Bland-Altman method was used to quantify agreement. Bias (mean difference between fCI-cCI) represents the systematic error between methods and precision (standard deviation of the bias) represents the random error or variability between techniques. The percentage error was considered clinically acceptable, and the tested method (Mobil-O-Graph NG) was regarded as interchangeable with the reference method (FloTrac/Vigileo), if it was below 30%. Results: One hundred and ninety-five patients were included in this study, and CI, measured in the 121 patients. The Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias -0.01 and the percentage error of 32.4%. And the difference is inversely increased according the mean CI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cho et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: