Trial reportJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2023
Bioimpedance based determination of cardiac index does not show enough trueness for point of care use in patients with systolic heart failure.
Trial report in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bridging the Gut Microbiota and the Brain, Kidney, and Cardiovascular Health: The Role of Probiotics.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac output (CO) is a key parameter in diagnostics and therapy of heart failure (HF). The thermodilution method (TD) as gold standard for CO determination is an invasive procedure with corresponding risks. As an alternative, thoracic bioimpedance (TBI) has gained popularity for CO estimation as it is non-invasive. However, systolic heart failure (HF) itself might worsen its validity. The present study validated TBI against TD. In patients with and without systolic HF (LVEF ≤ 50% or > 50% and NT-pro-BNP < 125 pg/ml, respectively) right heart catheterization including TD was performed. TBI (Task Force Monitor©, CNSystems, Graz, Austria) was conducted semi-simultaneously. 14 patients with and 17 patients without systolic HF were prospectively enrolled in this study. In all participants, TBI was obtainable. Bland-Altman analysis indicated a mean bias of 0.3 L/min (limits of agreement ± 2.0 L/min, percentage error or PE 43.3%) for CO and a bias of -7.3 ml (limits of agreement ± 34 ml) for cardiac stroke volume (SV). PE was markedly higher in patients with compared to patients without systolic HF (54% vs. 35% for CO). Underlying systolic HF substantially decreases the validity of TBI for estimation of CO and SV. In patients with systolic HF, TBI clearly lacks diagnostic accuracy and cannot be recommended for point-of-care decision making. Depending on the definition of an acceptable PE, TBI may be considered sufficient when systolic HF is absent.Trial registration number: DRKS00018964 (German Clinical Trial Register, retrospectively registered).
Indexed as
Identifiers
37074524What 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.