A comparison between four techniques to measure cardiac output.

Cardiac output is an important variable when monitoring hemodynamic status. In particular, changes in cardiac output represent the goal of several circulatory management therapies. Unfortunately, cardiac output is very difficult to estimate, either in experimental or clinical settings. The goal of this work is to compare four techniques to measure cardiac output: pressure-volume catheter, aortic flow probe, thermodilution, and the PiCCO monitor. These four techniques were simultaneously used during experiments of fluid and endotoxin administration on 7 pigs. Findings show that, first, each individual technique is precise, with a relative coefficient of repeatability lower than 7 %. Second, 1 cardiac output estimate provided by any technique relates poorly to the estimates from the other 3, even if there is only small bias between the techniques. Third, changes in cardiac output detected by one technique are only detected by the others in 62 to 100 % of cases. This study confirms the difficulty of obtaining a reliable clinical cardiac output measurement. Therefore, several measurements using different techniques should be performed, if possible, and all such should be treated with caution.

Stroke Volume estimation using aortic pressure measurements and aortic cross sectional area: Proof of concept.

Accurate Stroke Volume (SV) monitoring is essential for patient with cardiovascular dysfunction patients. However, direct SV measurements are not clinically feasible due to the highly invasive nature of measurement devices. Current devices for indirect monitoring of SV are shown to be inaccurate during sudden hemodynamic changes. This paper presents a novel SV estimation using readily available aortic pressure measurements and aortic cross sectional area, using data from a porcine experiment where medical interventions such as fluid replacement, dobutamine infusions, and recruitment maneuvers induced SV changes in a pig with circulatory shock. Measurement of left ventricular volume, proximal aortic pressure, and descending aortic pressure waveforms were made simultaneously during the experiment. From measured data, proximal aortic pressure was separated into reservoir and excess pressures. Beat-to-beat aortic characteristic impedance values were calculated using both aortic pressure measurements and an estimate of the aortic cross sectional area. SV was estimated using the calculated aortic characteristic impedance and excess component of the proximal aorta. The median difference between directly measured SV and estimated SV was -1.4ml with 95% limit of agreement +/- 6.6ml. This method demonstrates that SV can be accurately captured beat-to-beat during sudden changes in hemodynamic state. This novel SV estimation could enable improved cardiac and circulatory treatment in the critical care environment by titrating treatment to the effect on SV.