ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
The Pulmonary Artery Catheter in the Perioperative Setting: Should It Still Be Used?
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Evaluation of Popular Gen-AI Chatbots in Generating Patient Education Material on Pulmonary Artery Catheter Insertion.Annals of cardiac anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Pulmonary artery catheterisation.BJA education · 2024Review
- Anesthetic management of a patient with methamphetamine-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.JA clinical reports · 2023Article
- Association of low mixed venous oxygen saturations during early ICU stay with increased 30-day and 1-year mortality after cardiac surgery: a single-center retrospective study.BMC anesthesiology · 2022Article
- Critical Care Management Following Lung Transplantation.Journal of chest surgery · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) was introduced into clinical practice in the 1970s and was initially used to monitor patients with acute myocardial infarctions. The indications for using the PAC quickly expanded to critically ill patients in the intensive care unit as well as in the perioperative setting in patients undergoing major cardiac and noncardiac surgery. The utilization of the PAC is surrounded by multiple controversies, with literature claiming its benefits in the perioperative setting, and other publications showing no benefit. The right interpretation of the hemodynamic parameters measured by the PAC and its clinical implications are of the utmost essence in order to guide a specific therapy. Even though clinical trials have not shown a reduction in mortality with the use of the PAC, it still remains a valuable tool in a wide variety of clinical settings. In general, the right selection of the patient population (high-risk patients with or without hemodynamic instability undergoing high-risk procedures) as well as the right clinical setting (centers with experience and expertise) are essential in order for the patient to benefit most from PAC use.
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.