ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2022
A comparison of ClearSight noninvasive cardiac output and pulmonary artery bolus thermodilution cardiac output in cardiac surgery patients.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03807622 (A Prospective, Nonrandomized, Non-interventional Trial to Evaluate ClearSight System Cardiac Output in China), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
A Prospective, Nonrandomized, Non-interventional Trial to Evaluate ClearSight System Cardiac Output in China
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of Heart Function on the Assessment of MASLD Using Indocyanine Green Clearance.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Wearable ECG-PPG Deep Learning Model for Cardiac Index-Based Noninvasive Cardiac Output Estimation in Cardiac Surgery Patients.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Fluid responsiveness and hypotension in patients undergoing propofol-based sedation for colonoscopy following bowel preparation: a prospective cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2025Article
- Continuous Non-Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring in Cirrhotic Patients-Friend or Foe?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Continuous non-invasive vs. invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring during neuroradiological procedure: a comparative, prospective, monocentric, observational study.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2024Article
- Feasibility of continuous non-invasive delivery of oxygen monitoring in cardiac surgical patients: a proof-of-concept preliminary study.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
- Review
- Comment on "Noninvasive cardiac output measurements are inaccurate in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation".Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2023Article
- Current Commonly Used Dynamic Parameters and Monitoring Systems for Perioperative Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy: A Review.The Yale journal of biology and medicine · 2023Review
- Patent landscape review of non-invasive medical sensors for continuous monitoring of blood pressure and their validation in critical care practice.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ClearSight system measures blood pressure non-invasively and determines cardiac output by analyzing the continuous pressure waveform. We performed a multi-center clinical study in China to test the equivalence of cardiac output measured with the ClearSight system (CSCO) and cardiac output measured with the pulmonary artery catheter bolus thermodilution (TDCO) method.
methodsWe included adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery in three Chinese hospitals and measured TDCO and CSCO simultaneously after induction of anesthesia. Hemodynamic stability was required during measurement of TDCO and CSCO. At least four TDCO determinations were performed. The corresponding CSCO was determined as the average over a 30-s period following the injection of each bolus. A data pair for the comparison included the average of three or four accepted TDCO values and the average of the matching CSCO values. Main outcomes included Bland-Altman analysis of bias and standard deviation (SD) and the percentage error (PE).
resultsOne hundred twenty-five subjects were enrolled, and 122 TDCO and CSCO data pairs were available for analysis. Ninety-five (75.4%) data pairs were collected in hemodynamically stable conditions, mean (SD) CSCO was 4.21 (0.78) l/min, and mean TDCO was 3.90 (0.67) l/min. Bias was 0.32 (0.51) l/min, and PE was 25.2%. Analyzing all 122 data pairs resulted in a mean CSCO of 4.19 (0.82) l/min and a mean TDCO of 3.83 (0.71) l/min. Resulting bias was 0.36 (0.53) l/min, and PE was 26.4%.
conclusionsCSCO and TDCO agreed with a low systematic bias. Besides, mean PE was well below the pre-defined 30%. Hemodynamic stability only had a small impact on the analysis. We conclude that CSCO is equivalent to TDCO in cardiac surgery patients. The trial was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03807622 ; January 17, 2019.
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.