Why the study?
Does a transesophageal Doppler ultrasound monitor compare accurately to the thermodilution method for measuring cardiac output in patients undergoing major surgery?
Does a transesophageal Doppler ultrasound monitor compare accurately to the thermodilution method for measuring cardiac output in patients undergoing major surgery?
This study aims to evaluate whether a less invasive transesophageal Doppler ultrasound monitor can reliably measure cardiac output compared to the standard thermodilution method.
Transesophageal Doppler cardiac output accuracy remains unproven in major surgery; leaves open validation against thermodilution.
The measurement of cardiac output (CO) is an important part of anesthetic practice in patients undergoing major surgery. The thermodilution method (TDM), using a pulmonary artery catheter, is still accepted as the standard procedure. However, the use of the method is associated with several limitations and severe complications. The use of a transesophageal Doppler ultrasound monitor (EDUM; Hemosonic 100 TM ) is less invasive and calculates CO from a simultaneous measurement of blood flow velocity and diameter of the descending aorta. The aim of this study was to compare the cardiac output measured by the use of the TDM and an EDUM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ok et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: