Is there still a place for the Swan‒Ganz catheter? We are not sure.

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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. 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) · 2021
   Pooled it
2. Why do we use transpulmonary thermodilution and pulmonary artery catheter in severe shock patients?Annals of intensive care · 2025
   Article
3. How can assessing hemodynamics help to assess volume status?Intensive care medicine · 2022
   Review
4. The Pulmonary Artery Catheter in the Perioperative Setting: Should It Still Be Used?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
   Review
5. Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management?Intensive care medicine · 2020
   Review
6. Haemodynamic monitoring and management in COVID-19 intensive care patients: an International survey.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2020
   Article
7. Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices for Cardiogenic Shock: State of the Art.Critical care (London, England) · 2019
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as