Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29912937›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2018

Comparison of three non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring methods in critically ill children.

Chanapai Chaiyakulsil, Marut Chantra, Poomiporn Katanyuwong, Anant Khositseth, Nattachai Anantasit

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Electrocardiometry for Hemodynamic Categorization and Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness in Pediatric Septic Shock: A Pilot Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chanapai ChaiyakulsilDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatric, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Marut ChantraDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatric, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Poomiporn KatanyuwongDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Cardiology, Department of Pediatric, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Anant KhositsethDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatric, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nattachai AnantasitDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Critical Care, Department of Pediatric, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-2770-1718
Mahidol University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHemodynamic parameters measurements were widely conducted using pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) with thermodilution as a reference standard. Due to its technical difficulties in children, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) has been widely employed instead. Nonetheless, TTE requires expertise and is time-consuming. Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring such as ultrasonic cardiac output monitor (USCOM) and electrical velocimetry (EV) can be performed rapidly with less expertise requirement. Presently, there are inconsistent evidences, variable precision, and reproducibility of EV, USCOM and TTE measurements. Our objective was to compare USCOM, EV and TTE in hemodynamic measurements in critically ill children. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a single center, prospective observational study in critically ill children. Children with congenital heart diseases and unstable hemodynamics were excluded. Simultaneous measurements of hemodynamic parameters were conducted using USCOM, EV, and TTE. Inter-rater reliability was determined. Bland-Altman plots were used to analyse agreement of assessed parameters.

resultsAnalysis was performed in 121 patients with mean age of 4.9 years old and 56.2% of male population. Interrater reliability showed acceptable agreement in all measured parameters (stroke volume (SV), cardiac output (CO), velocity time integral (VTI), inotropy (INO), flow time corrected (FTC), aortic valve diameter (AV), systemic vascular resistance (SVR), and stroke volume variation (SVV); (Cronbach's alpha 0.76-0.98). Percentages of error in all parameters were acceptable by Bland-Altman analysis (9.2-28.8%) except SVR (30.8%) and SVV (257.1%).

conclusionThree noninvasive methods might be used interchangeably in pediatric critical care settings with stable hemodynamics. Interpretation of SVV and SVR measurements must be done with prudence.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessCardiac OutputChild, PreschoolEchocardiographyFemaleHemodynamic MonitoringHemodynamicsHumansMaleProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsRheologyStroke VolumeUltrasonographyVascular Resistance

Identifiers

PMID29912937
PMCPMC6005547
OpenAlexW2809104468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.