Why the study?
Lithium chloride administration via a peripheral vein for cardiac output measurement was validated in pigs and dogs, but comparison between cephalic and jugular routes in goats had not been evaluated.
Does lithium chloride administration via cephalic vein compared to jugular vein provide agreeable cardiac output measurements in isoflurane-anaesthetised goats?
Does lithium chloride administration via cephalic vein compared to jugular vein provide agreeable cardiac output measurements in isoflurane-anaesthetised goats?
In isoflurane-anaesthetised goats, cardiac output measurements using lithium dilution via cephalic versus jugular veins showed acceptable bias but poor trending ability, indicating less precision than expected.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cephalic and jugular LiCl routes yield comparable CO values in anaesthetized goats; leaves open whether results apply clinically or in other species.
The administration of lithium chloride (LiCl) for cardiac output (CO) measurement via a peripheral instead of a central vein has been described previously as a valid alternative route in pigs and dogs. The aim of the study was to compare CO measurements after administration of LiCl using two peripheral veins, cephalic or jugular, in goats. Ten adult, female, experimental goats undergoing bilateral stifle arthrotomy were recruited for the study. Paired CO measurements were taken two minutes apart during stable conditions in isoflurane-anaesthetised goats. Forty-two paired CO measurements were taken in total, and the median (range) of paired CO measurement per goat were 4.5 (3–6). The mean (SD) CO using the cephalic and jugular vein for injection of LiCl was 5.28 (1.29) L min−1 and 5.20 (1.24) L min−1 respectively. The Bland-Altman analysis showed an acceptable agreement with a mean bias of 1.33% with limits of agreement (LoA) of −18.43 to 21.09%. The percentage of error was 25%. The four-quadrant plot analysis showed a poor agreement (71%) between the two routes. The polar plot showed a poor trending ability. An 86% inclusion rate (18/21 points) was reached with a ± 35° radial sector size. The findings revealed that the agreement between the two routes is not as precise as the authors expected, however the results are comparable with studies published previously.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fernández et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: