ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2018
Reliability of thermodilution derived cardiac output with different operator characteristics.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Estimated Fick Method Systematically Over-Estimates Cardiac Index Compared to Thermodilution in Children.Pediatric cardiology · 2025Article
- The contemporary pulmonary artery catheter. Part 2: measurements, limitations, and clinical applications.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022Review
- Letter to the editor in response to "Agreement between continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution for cardiac output measurement in perioperative and intensive care medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis".Critical care (London, England) · 2021Article
- Electrochemical Approach to Measure Physiological Fluid Flow Rates.Frontiers in chemistry · 2021Article
- Journal of clinical monitoring and computing end of year summary 2018: hemodynamic monitoring and management.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac output (CO) is commonly measured using the thermodilution technique at the time of right heart catheterisation (RHC). However inter-operator variability, and the operator characteristics which may influence that, has not been quantified. Therefore, this study aimed to assess inter-operator variability with the thermodilution technique using a mock circulation loop (MCL) with calibrated flow sensors. Participants were blinded and asked to determine 4 levels of CO using the thermodilution technique, which was compared with the MCL calibrated flow sensors. The MCL was used to randomly generate CO between 3.0 and 7.0 L/min through changes in heart rate, contractility and vascular resistance with a RHC inserted through the MCL pulmonary artery. Participant characteristics including gender, specialty, age, height, weight, body-mass index, grip strength and RHC experience were recorded and compared to determine their relationship with CO measurement accuracy. In total, there were 15 participants, made up of consultant cardiologists (6), advanced trainees in cardiology (5) and intensive care consultants (4). The majority (9) had performed 26-100 previous RHCs, while 4 had performed more than 100 RHCs. Compared to the MCL-measured CO, participants overestimated CO using the thermodilution technique with a mean difference of +0.75 ± 0.71 L/min. The overall r
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.