Key result
Esophageal continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography significantly correlated with thermodilution (r=0.935, P<0.001) and was more reproducible, with a coefficient of variation of 5.2% vs 8.3%.
Why the study?
Does esophageal continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography accurately and reproducibly measure cardiac output compared to thermodilution in surgical patients under general anesthesia?
Population
25 surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia in the supine position
Comparison
Esophageal continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography vs Thermodilution cardiac output (TDCO)
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
May support esophageal Doppler for reproducible CO monitoring in anesthesia; leaves open need for outcome trials before practice change.
Observational (n=25)
Does esophageal continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography accurately and reproducibly measure cardiac output compared to thermodilution in surgical patients under general anesthesia?
Effect estimate: Correlation coefficient 0.935
Absolute Event Rate: 5.2% vs 8.3%
p-value: p=<0.001
Esophageal Doppler provides a noninvasive, reproducible, and accurate alternative to thermodilution for continuous cardiac output monitoring during anesthesia.
Kemmotsu et al. (1991) conducted an observational in Surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia (n=25). Esophageal continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography (ECO) vs. Thermodilution cardiac output (TDCO) was evaluated on Correlation and reproducibility (coefficient of variation) of cardiac output measurement (Correlation coefficient 0.935, p=<0.001). Esophageal continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography significantly correlated with thermodilution (r=0.935, P<0.001) and was more reproducible, with a coefficient of variation of 5.2% vs 8.3%.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: