Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2019
Cardiac output measurement in liver transplantation patients using pulmonary and transpulmonary thermodilution: a comparative study.
Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04825015 (Hemodynamic Monitoring in Liver Transplant With VEnaRt Cardiac Output Versus Swan-Ganz Catheter VERO Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Hemodynamic Monitoring in Liver Transplant With VEnaRt Cardiac Output Versus Swan-Ganz Catheter VERO Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison of hemodynamic measurement methods during orthotopic liver transplantation: evaluating agreement and trending ability of PiCCO versus pulmonary artery catheter techniques.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
- The Challenging Management of an Intracardiac Thrombus in a Liver Transplant Patient at the Reperfusion Phase: A Case Report and Brief Literature Review.Transplantation direct · 2021Article
- Indocyanine green dye clearance test: early graft (dys)-function and long-term mortality after liver transplant. Should we continue to use it? An observational study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2021Observational
- Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing end of year summary 2019: hemodynamic monitoring and management.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During liver transplantation surgery, the pulmonary artery catheter-despite its invasiveness-remains the gold standard for measuring cardiac output. However, the new EV1000 transpulmonary thermodilution calibration technique was recently introduced into the market by Edwards LifeSciences. We designed a single-center prospective observational study to determine if these two techniques for measuring cardiac output are interchangeable in this group of patients. Patients were monitored with both pulmonary artery catheter and the EV1000 system. Simultaneous intermittent cardiac output measurements were collected at predefined steps: after induction of anesthesia (T1), during the anhepatic phase (T2), after liver reperfusion (T3), and at the end of the surgery (T4). The 4-quadrant and polar plot techniques were used to assess trending ability between the two methods. We enrolled 49 patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation surgery. We analyzed a total of 588 paired measurements. The mean bias between pulmonary artery catheter and the EV1000 system was 0.35 L/min with 95% limits of agreement of - 2.30 to 3.01 L/min, and an overall percentage error of 35%. The concordance rate between the two techniques in 4-quadrant plot analysis was 65% overall. The concordance rate of the polar plot showed an overall value of 83% for all pairs. In the present study, in liver transplantation patients we found that intermittent cardiac output monitoring with EV1000 system showed a percentage error compared with pulmonary artery catheter in the acceptable threshold of 45%. On the others hand, our results showed a questionable trending ability between the two techniques.
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.