Key result
3D echocardiography moderately correlates with thermodilution but underestimates resting cardiac output by ~0.6 L/min.
Why the study?
There were no studies available to determine whether cardiac output measured by thermodilution can be reliably predicted by three-dimensional echocardiography under changing hemodynamic conditions.
Does three-dimensional echocardiography accurately measure cardiac output compared to thermodilution at rest and under dobutamine stress in pigs with ischemic myocardium?
Does three-dimensional echocardiography accurately measure cardiac output compared to thermodilution at rest and under dobutamine stress in pigs with ischemic myocardium?
Mean Difference: 0.6
p-value: p=< 0.001
Three-dimensional echocardiography can determine cardiac output at rest but underestimates it at elevated heart rates due to inadequate temporal resolution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
3-D echo may estimate CO at rest but not during stress; leaves open reliability for clinical hemodynamic monitoring.
Handke et al. (2003) studied Ischemic myocardium (n=15). 3-D echocardiography vs. Thermodilution was evaluated on Cardiac output (MD 0.6 L/min, p=< 0.001). 3-D echocardiography showed moderate correlation with thermodilution for measuring cardiac output (r=0.72, P<0.001), but underestimated values at rest (mean difference 0.6 L/min) and under stress.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: