Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31456071›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2020

Cardiac output estimation by multi-beat analysis of the radial arterial blood pressure waveform versus intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution: a method comparison study in patients treated in the intensive care unit after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.

Gillis Greiwe, Valerie Peters, Alexander Hapfelmeier, Stefano Romagnoli, Mathias Kubik, Bernd Saugel

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. What is new in hemodynamic monitoring and management?Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Gillis GreiweDepartment of Anesthesiology, Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Valerie PetersDepartment of Anesthesiology, Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Alexander HapfelmeierInstitute of Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Stefano RomagnoliDepartment of Health Science, Section of Anesthesia and Critical Care, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Mathias KubikDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Heart Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Bernd SaugelDepartment of Anesthesiology, Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. bernd.saugel@gmx.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6619-0722
Universität Hamburg · DEAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi · ITTUM Klinikum · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiac output (CO) is a key hemodynamic variable that can be minimally invasively estimated by pulse wave analysis. Multi-beat analysis is a novel pulse wave analysis method. In this prospective observational clinical method comparison study, we compared CO estimations by multi-beat analysis with CO measured by intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution (PATD) in adult patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (OPCAB). We included patients after planned admission to the ICU after elective OPCAB who were monitored with a radial arterial catheter and a pulmonary artery catheter. At seven time points, we determined CO using intermittent PATD (PATD-CO; reference method) and simultaneously recorded the radial arterial blood pressure waveform that we later used to estimate CO using multi-beat analysis (MBA-CO; test method) with the Argos monitor (Retia Medical; Valhalla, NY, USA). Blood pressure waveforms impaired by inappropriate damping properties or artifacts were excluded. We compared PATD-CO and MBA-CO using Bland-Altman analysis accounting for repeated measurements, the percentage error, and the concordance rate derived from four-quadrant plot analysis (15% exclusion zone). We analyzed 167 CO values of 31 patients. Mean PATD-CO was 5.30 ± 1.22 L/min and mean MBA-CO was 5.55 ± 1.82 L/min. The mean of the differences between PATD-CO and MBA-CO was 0.08 ± 1.10 L/min (95% limits of agreement: - 2.13 L/min to + 2.29 L/min). The percentage error was 40.7%. The four-quadrant plot-derived concordance rate was 88%. CO estimation by multi-beat analysis of the radial arterial blood pressure waveform (Argos monitor) shows reasonable agreement compared with CO measured by intermittent PATD in adult patients treated in the ICU after OPCAB.

Indexed as

Arterial PressureAdultAgedBlood PressureCardiac OutputCatheterization, Swan-GanzCoronary Artery Bypass, Off-PumpCritical CareFemaleHemodynamicsHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicProspective StudiesAnesthesiaCardiovascular dynamicsHemodynamic monitoringPulmonary artery catheterPulse contour analysisPulse wave analysisSwan–Ganz catheter

Identifiers

PMID31456071
PMCPMC7367901
OpenAlexW2970747042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.