Observational studyMedicine2020
Can bioimpedance cardiography assess hemodynamic response to passive leg raising in critically ill patients: A STROBE-compliant study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heart-Rate-Dependent Right-to-Left Shunting Through a Patent Foramen Ovale in Severe Right Ventricular Dysfunction: A Case Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Performance of four cardiac output monitoring techniques vs. intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution during a modified passive leg raise maneuver in isoflurane-anesthetized dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractPassive leg raising (PLR) is a convenient and reliable test to predict fluid responsiveness. The ability of thoracic electrical bioimpedance cardiography (TEB) to monitor changes of cardiac output (CO) during PLR is unknown.In the present study, we measured CO in 61 patients with shock or dyspnea by TEB and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during PLR procedure. Positive PLR responsiveness was defined as the velocity-time integral (VTI) ≥10% after PLR. TTE measured VTI in the left ventricular output tract. The predictive value of TEB parameters in PLR responders was tested. Furthermore, the agreement of absolute CO values between TEB and TTE measurements was assessed.Among the 61 patients, there were 28 PLR-responders and 33 non-responders. Twenty-seven patients were diagnosed with shock and 34 patients with dyspnea, with 55.6% (15/27) and 54.6% (18/34) non-responders, respectively. A change in TEB measured CO (ΔCO) ≥9.8% predicted PLR responders with 75.0% sensitivity and 78.8% specificity, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.79. The Δd2Z/dt2 (a secondary derivative of the impedance wave) showed the best predictive value with AUROC of 0.90, the optimal cut point was -7.1% with 85.7% sensitivity and 87.9% specificity. Bias between TEB and TTE measured CO was 0.12 L/min, and the percentage error was 65.8%.TEB parameters had promising performance in predicting PLR responders, and the Δd2Z/dt2 had the best predictive value. The CO values measured by TEB were not interchangeable with TTE in critically ill settings.
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.