Catéter de Swan Ganz: Opinión de expertos

Actualmente existen dudas sobre la seguridad del uso del catéter de Swan Ganz (CSG). Para definir la opinión de los cardiólogos de nuestro país, el Consejo de Emergencias Cardiovasculares de la Sociedad Argentina de Cardiología (SAC) realizó una reunión para evaluar la opinión de expertos en diferentes escenarios (cirugía no cardíaca, cardíaca, síndromes coronarios e insuficiencia cardíaca), usando el método RAND-UCLA appropiateness. Se envió la evidencia bibliográfica previa a la reunión en la SAC y en la misma los panelistas seleccionaron las variables para conformar las situaciones clínicas que luego fueron enviadas para que individualmente, en una segunda etapa, determinaran si consideraban beneficioso o perjudicial la utilización del catéter con una escala de 1 a 9 (1 significaba que los potenciales perjuicios superaban a los beneficios, 9 que los beneficios eran mayores y 5 que podía considerarse indistintamente beneficioso o perjudicial). Dos expertos analizaron los resultados, describiendo la tasa de acuerdo/desacuerdo. Finalmente, cada indicación se clasificó como “apropiada”, “dudosa” o inapropiada de acuerdo a la mediana definida por los panelistas: 1-3 se clasificó como inapropiado, 4-6 dudoso y 7-9 como indicación apropiada. Observamos gran discrepancia en la opinión sobre la indicación de CSG entre los expertos. Sin embargo, los panelistas estuvieron a favor de su utilización en situaciones que incluían shock y disfunción miocárdica, especialmente cuando se asoció disfunción orgánica. Hubo situaciones en las que los panelistas consideraron inapropiada la indicación del CSG, en pacientes sin disfunción orgánica.

Investigators have raised doubts as to the safety of the Swan Ganz catheter (SGC). In order to define the point of view of cardiologists in our country, the Argentine Society of Cardiology’s Emergency Council organized a meeting to analyze their views in different settings (non-cardiac surgery, cardiac surgery, acute coronary syndromes and heart failure) using the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method. A detailed review with the scientific evidence was sent to the experts in cardiology prior to the meeting in the SAC auditorium where the panellists selected the clinical variables create the specific situations. These hypothetic situations were resent to the panellists at a second stage for their individual evaluation, rating the benefit-to-harm ratio of the procedure on a scale of 1 to 9 (1 meant that the expected harms greatly outweighed the expected benefits, and 9 that the expected benefits greatly outweighed the expected harms, 5 could mean either that the harms and benefits were roughly equal). Two experts analyzed the results, describing the agreement/disagreement ratio. Finally, each indication was classified as “appropriate,” “uncertain” or “inappropriate” for the procedure in accordance with the panelists’ median score: median scores in the 1-3 range were classified as inappropriate, those in the 4-6 range as uncertain, and those in the 7-9 range as appropriate. We observed high disagreement rates in SGC indications between cardiologists. However, the panelists were in favor of SGC use when situations included shock and myocardial dysfunction, especially in the presence of organic dysfunction. There were some situations when panelists considered SGC not useful, in patients without organ failure.

Avaliação da variabilidade de intervenções baseadas no cateter de artéria pulmonar: experiência brasileira / Variability in interventions with pulmonary artery catheter data: Brazilian experience

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A utilização do cateter de artéria pulmonar (CAP) é ainda fonte de debates, devido aos questionamentos sobre sua segurança e eficácia. Este estudo reproduz, entre uma amostra de médicos brasileiros, outra pesquisa, na qual foi evidenciada a heterogeneidade de condutas guiadas através dos dados fornecidos pelo CAP entre médicos norte-americanos. MÉTODO: Durante o Congresso Brasileiro de Medicina Intensiva (Curitiba, 2004), foram distribuídos formulários nos quais constavam três casos com dados de CAP e, na metade deles, de ecocardiografia. Foi solicitado aos médicos que assinalassem uma entre seis opções terapêuticas. Determinou-se que uma resposta homogênea resultaria em uma escolha selecionada por pelo menos 80 por cento dos respondedores. RESULTADOS: Duzentos e trinta e sete médicos responderam os formulários. Em todos os três casos foram observadas escolhas de intervenção terapêutica completamente distintas, nenhuma delas obtendo mais de 80 por cento de concordância. Quando se comparam as escolhas direcionadas pelos resultados da ecocardiografia, observou-se a persistência da variação de escolhas e que nenhuma delas alcançou número suficiente para ser considerada homogênea. CONCLUSÕES: Semelhantemente ao estudo original, observou-se total heterogeneidade nas condutas dirigidas pelo CAP, o que, em última instância, pode indicar conhecimento inadequado de conceitos fisiopatológicos básicos, e que o ensino nos cursos médicos precisa ser revisto e aprimorado.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Use of Pulmonary Artery Catheter (PAC) is still a debatable issue, mainly due to questions raised about its security and efficacy. This study reproduced in a sample of Brazilian physicians, another one conducted amidst American doctors, in which was pointed out the heterogeneity of clinical decisions guided by data obtained from PAC. METHODS: During the Brazilian Congress of Intensive Care Medicine (Curitiba 2004), doctors were asked to answer a survey form with three vignettes. Each of them contained PAC data and one half of the surveys contained echocardiographic information. Every doctor was asked to select one of six interventions for each vignette. A homogeneous answer was considered when it was selected by at least 80 percent of the respondents. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty seven doctors answered the questionnaires. They selected completely different therapeutic interventions in all three vignettes and none of the interventions achieved more than 80 percent agreement. Variability persisted with the choices guided by echocardiography. CONCLUSIONS: As in the original study, we observed total heterogeneity of therapeutic interventions guided by CAP and echocardiography. These results could be caused by lack of knowledge about basic pathophysiologic concepts and maybe we had to improve its teaching at the medical school benches.

El catéter de Swan-Ganz / Swan-Ganz catheter

Si debemos monitorizar en forma invasora al paciente gravemente enfermo es importante tener en cuenta como primera medida al sistema cardivascular. Existen varias razones por ello: el paciente gravemente enfermo por lo general experimenta un compromiso en la función de su sistema cardivascular, en forma variable; las alteraciones cardiorespiratorias y el transporte del oxígeno determinan, junto con el estado del sistema nerviosos central, el pronóstico a corto plazo del invididuo; las alteraciones cardiovasculares son frecuentemente súbitas y pueden acarrear consecuencias funestas si no se reconocenen forma precoz; las alteraciones del sistema cardivascular no son predecibles en forma fiable y temprena basados en el método clínico tradicional (observación, palpación, percusión y auscultación).