Key result
Impedance cardiography yields ~10% higher cardiac output measurements than dye dilution with slightly better reproducibility.
Why the study?
The reliability and accuracy of impedance cardiography compared to the dye dilution method for measuring cardiac output in acute myocardial infarction patients was evaluated.
Does impedance cardiography provide reliable measurements of cardiac output compared to the dye dilution method in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Population
10 patients with acute myocardial infarction 2–3 weeks after admission to Coronary Care Unit
Comparison
Impedance cardiography vs dye dilution methods for cardiac output measurement
Design
Observational simultaneous measurement study
Authors
Loading...
May support non-invasive trend monitoring in AMI recovery; leaves open absolute accuracy versus dye dilution.
Observational (n=10)
Does impedance cardiography provide reliable measurements of cardiac output compared to the dye dilution method in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Effect estimate: 9.7% higher
Impedance cardiography provides a reliable and reproducible non-invasive method for measuring relative changes in cardiac output in patients recovering from acute myocardial infarction.
Gabriel et al. (1976) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction (n=10). Impedance cardiography vs. Dye dilution method was evaluated on Cardiac output (9.7% higher). Impedance cardiography yielded cardiac output measurements on average 9.7% higher than the dye dilution method, with a reproducibility of 4.1% compared to 5.1%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: