Key result
Non-invasive cardiac output measurement techniques offer a safe and increasingly reliable alternative to invasive methods for hemodynamic monitoring across various clinical settings.
Why the study?
Non-invasive cardiac output measurement methods increasingly offer safe and widely available alternatives to invasive techniques, requiring clinical guidance on their application.
Design
Review article
Authors
Loading...
May support non-invasive monitoring where invasive risks outweigh benefits; leaves open need for rigorous prospective validation.
Non-invasive cardiac output measurement methods are increasingly important in clinical practice due to their safety and availability, serving as viable alternatives to invasive monitoring in appropriate clinical scenarios.
Stępniak et al. (2021) conducted a review in Hemodynamic monitoring. Non-invasive cardiac output measurement methods vs. Invasive methods (e.g., pulmonary artery catheterization) was evaluated. Non-invasive cardiac output measurement techniques offer a safe and increasingly reliable alternative to invasive methods for hemodynamic monitoring across various clinical settings.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: