Key result
FloTrac/Vigileo showed contrasting agreement with thermodilution for cardiac output measurement across 19 trials, with most studies lacking adequate statistical design to draw reliable conclusions.
Why the study?
Does Flotrac/Vigileo pulse contour analysis agree with the thermodilution method for measuring cardiac output?
Does Flotrac/Vigileo pulse contour analysis agree with the thermodilution method for measuring cardiac output?
Current evidence is insufficient due to poor statistical design to determine if Flotrac/Vigileo pulse contour analysis reliably agrees with thermodilution for cardiac output measurement.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evidence insufficient to endorse FloTrac/Vigileo clinically; leaves open need for rigorously designed agreement trials.
We reviewed the comparative trials of the Flotrac/VigileoTM versus the thermodilution method, published in the last decade. The results about the agreement between the two methods measuring cardiac output are contrasting. We also noticed that almost the whole pertinent literature include studies conducted without a correct statistical design, particularly about the sample size. For this reason, we consider that results of the published studies do not permit any conclusion about the agreement between pulse contour analysis for cardiac output measurement and thermodilution method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giustiniano et al. (2011) conducted a review in Patients requiring cardiac output monitoring (n=575). FloTrac/Vigileo (pulse contour analysis) vs. Thermodilution method was evaluated on Agreement between FloTrac/Vigileo and thermodilution (percentage error and bias). FloTrac/Vigileo showed contrasting agreement with thermodilution for cardiac output measurement across 19 trials, with most studies lacking adequate statistical design to draw reliable conclusions.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: