Why the study?
Does a new continuous pulmonary artery catheter provide valid assessment of right ventricular ejection fraction compared to transoesophageal echocardiography in cardiac surgical patients?
Does a new continuous pulmonary artery catheter provide valid assessment of right ventricular ejection fraction compared to transoesophageal echocardiography in cardiac surgical patients?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A new continuous pulmonary artery catheter system provides valid right ventricular ejection fraction measurements compared to transoesophageal echocardiography, particularly under stable hemodynamic conditions.
In 25 cardiac surgical patients, right ventricular ejection fraction was continuously measured with a new pulmonary artery catheter and transoesophageal echocardiography, scanning the 'fractional area change' in a standardised transatrial cross section area. Measurements were recorded at three predefined time points (pre-, intra-, and postoperatively). Both methods were compared using the Bland-Altman analysis. Comparing right ventricular ejection fraction values obtained from the pulmonary artery catheter with those assessed by transoesophageal echocardiography, bias was -3.7%, with a precision of 30.9%. Bias and precision significantly improved when the heart rate was less than 100 beats.min(-1), pulmonary artery pressures were low and cardiac performance adequate. In conclusion, the new continuous pulmonary artery catheter system appears to be a valid and useful bedside monitoring device in the haemodynamic management of critically ill patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zink et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: