ArticlePloS one2019
Thermodilution vs estimated Fick cardiac output measurement in an elderly cohort of patients: A single-centre experience.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioimpedance based determination of cardiac index does not show enough trueness for point of care use in patients with systolic heart failure.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023Trial
- Cardiac Index Measured Using the Fick Principle Versus Thermodilution in Children Following Orthotopic Heart Transplantation.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Predicting cardiac index from coronary angiogram videos: a novel application of 3D convolutional neural networks.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Post lung-transplant predictive value of thermodilution vs estimated Fick cardiac output measurement.JHLT open · 2025Article
- Accuracy of VOHerz · 2024Article
- Comparison between thermodilution and Fick methods for resting and exercise-induced cardiac output measurement in patients with chronic dyspnea.Pulmonary circulation · 2022Article
- A novel approach to determine aortic valve area with phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPatients referred to the cath-lab are an increasingly elderly population. Thermodilution (TD, gold standard) and the estimated Fick method (eFM) are interchangeably used in the clinical routine to measure cardiac output (CO). However, their correlation in an elderly cohort of cardiac patients has not been tested so far.
methodsA single, clinically-indicated right heart catheterization was performed on each patient with CO estimated by eFM and TD in 155 consecutive patients (75.1±6.8 years, 57.7% male) between April 2015 and August 2017. Whole Body Oxygen Consumption (VO2) was assumed by applying the formulas of LaFarge (LaF), Dehmer (De) and Bergstra (Be). CO was indexed to body surface area (Cardiac Index, CI).
resultsCI-TD showed an overall moderate correlation to CI-eFM as assessed by LaF, De or Be (r2 = 0.53, r2 = 0.54, r2 = 0.57, all p < .001, respectively) with large limits of agreement (-0.64 to 1.09, -1.07 to 0.77, -1.38 to 0.53 l/m2/min, respectively). The mean difference of CI between methods was 0.22, -0.15 and -0.42 (all p<0.001 for difference to TD), respectively. A rate of error ≥20% occurred with the equations by LaF, De or Be in 40.6%, 26.5% and 36.1% of patients, respectively. A CI <2.2 l/m2min was present in 42.6% of patients according to TD and in 60.0%, 31.0% and in 16.1% of patients according to eFM by the formulas of LaF, De or Be.
conclusionAlthough CI-eFM shows an overall reasonable correlation with CI-TD, the predictive value in a single patient is low. CI-eFM cannot replace CI-TD in elderly patients.
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.