Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31011425›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive care2019

Disagreement in cardiac output measurements between fourth-generation FloTrac and critical care ultrasonography in patients with circulatory shock: a prospective observational study.

Thomas Kaufmann, Ramon P Clement, Bart Hiemstra, Jaap Jan Vos, Thomas W L Scheeren, Frederik Keus, Iwan C C van der Horst, SICS Study Group

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02912624 (Combining Conventional With Advanced Hemodynamic Parameters for Predicting the Outcome of Critically Ill Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

NCT02912624 completednot on this map

Combining Conventional With Advanced Hemodynamic Parameters for Predicting the Outcome of Critically Ill Patients: a Pilot for a Registry

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity Medical Center GroningenRan2015 to 2017Enrolled1,090ConditionsCritical Illness, Acute Disease, Shock
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas Kaufmann1Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0589-8879
Ramon P Clement1Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
Bart Hiemstra1Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6547-2138
Jaap Jan Vos1Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0597-6462
Thomas W L Scheeren1Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9184-4190
Frederik Keus2Department of Critical Care, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Iwan C C van der Horst2Department of Critical Care, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3891-8522
SICS Study Group
University Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiac output measurements may inform diagnosis and provide guidance of therapeutic interventions in patients with hemodynamic instability. The FloTrac™ algorithm uses uncalibrated arterial pressure waveform analysis to estimate cardiac output. Recently, a new version of the algorithm has been developed. The aim was to assess the agreement between FloTrac™ and routinely performed cardiac output measurements obtained by critical care ultrasonography in patients with circulatory shock.

methodsA prospective observational study was performed in a tertiary hospital from June 2016 to January 2017. Adult critically ill patients with circulatory shock were eligible for inclusion. Cardiac output was measured simultaneously using FloTrac™ with a fourth-generation algorithm (CO

resultEighty-nine paired cardiac output measurements were performed in 17 patients during their first 24 h of admittance. CO

conclusionsIn critically ill patients with circulatory shock, there was disagreement and clinically unacceptable trending ability between values of cardiac output obtained by uncalibrated arterial pressure waveform analysis and critical care ultrasonography.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02912624, registered on September 23, 2016.

Indexed as

Cardiac outputCritical care ultrasonographyCritically illIntensive careMonitoringPulse contour analysisShock

Identifiers

PMID31011425
PMCPMC6460822
OpenAlexW2942583722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.