Trial reportPloS one2018
Accuracy and precision of ScvO2 measured with the CeVOX-device: A prospective study in patients with a wide variation of ScvO2-values.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do ScvOPhysiological reports · 2021Trial
- Capnodynamic assessment of mixed venous oxygen saturation in a porcine experimental endotoxemic model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Non-invasive capnodynamic mixed venous oxygen saturation during major changes in oxygen delivery.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022Article
- The predictive value of lung ultrasound combined with central venous oxygen saturation variations in the outcome of ventilator weaning in patients after thoracic surgery.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
- The Various Oximetric Techniques Used for the Evaluation of Blood Oxygenation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Assessment of Regional Perfusion and Organ Function: Less and Non-invasive Techniques.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCentral-venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) is a key parameter of hemodynamic monitoring and has been suggested as therapeutic goal for resuscitation. Several devices offer continuous monitoring features. The CeVOX-device (Pulsion Medical Systems) uses a fibre-optic probe inserted through a conventional central-venous catheter (CVC) to obtain continuous ScvO2.
objectivesSince there is a lack of studies validating the CeVOX, we prospectively analyzed data from 24 patients with CeVOX-monitoring. To increase the yield of lower ScvO2-values, 12 patients were equipped with a femoral CVC.
methodsDuring the 8h study period ScvO2_CeVOX was documented immediately before withdrawal of blood to measure ScvO2 by blood gas analysis (ScvO2_BGA) 6min, 1h, 4h, 5h and 8h after the initial calibration. No further calibrations were performed.
resultsIn patients with jugular CVC (primary endpoint; 60 measurements), bias, lower and upper limits of agreement (LLOA; ULOA) and percentage error (PE) of the estimate of ScvO2 (ScvO2_CeVOX_jug) were acceptable with 0.45%, -13.0%, 13.9% and 16.6%, respectively. As supposed, ScvO2 was lower in the femoral compared to the jugular measurements (69.5±10.7 vs. 79.4±5.8%; p<0.001). While the bias (0.64%) was still acceptable, LLOA (-23.8%), ULOA (25.0%) and PE (34.5%) were substantially higher for femoral assessment of ScvO2 by the CeVOX (ScvO2_CeVOX_fem). Analysis of the entire data-pool with jugular as well as femoral CVCs allowed for a multivariate analysis which demonstrated that the position of the CVC per se was not independently associated with the bias ScvO2_CeVOX-ScvO2_BGA. The amount of the bias |ScvO2_CeVOX-ScvO2_BGA| was independently associated with the amount of the change of ScvO2_CeVOX compared to the initial calibration to ScvO2_BGA_baseline (|ScvO2_CeVOX-ScvO2_BGA_baseline|) as well as with low values of ScvO2_BGA_baseline. Furthermore, increasing time to the initial calibration was associated to the amount of the bias with borderline significance. A statistical model based on |ScvO2_CeVOX-ScvO2_BGA_baseline| and "time to last calibration" derived from an evaluation dataset (80 of 120 datasets, 16 of 24) provided a ROC-AUC of 0.903 to predict an amount of the bias |ScvO2_CeVOX-ScvO2_BGA| ≥5% in an independent validation group (40 datasets of 8 patients).
conclusionThese findings suggest that the CeVOX device is capable to detect stability or instability of ScvO2_BGA. ScvO2_CeVOX accurately estimates ScvO2_BGA in case of stable values. However, intermittent measurement of ScvO2_BGA and re-calibration should be performed in case of substantial changes in ScvO2_CeVOX compared to baseline. Therefore, continuous measurement of ScvO2 with the CeVOX cannot replace ScvO2_BGA in instable patients. On the other hand, CeVOX might be useful for the monitoring of stable patients as a pre-test tool for more differentiated monitoring in case of changes in ScvO2_CeVOX.
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.