ArticlePloS one2024
Comparison of cardiac output estimates obtained from the Antares oscillometric pulse wave analysis algorithm and from Doppler transthoracic echocardiography.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn cardiology, cardiac output (CO) is an important parameter for assessing cardiac function. While invasive thermodilution procedures are the gold standard for CO assessment, transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) has become the established method for routine CO assessment in daily clinical practice. However, a demand persists for non-invasive approaches, including oscillometric pulse wave analysis (PWA), to enhance the accuracy of CO estimation, reduce complications associated with invasive procedures, and facilitate its application in non-intensive care settings. Here, we aimed to compare the TTE and oscillometric PWA algorithm Antares for a non-invasive estimation of CO.
methodsNon-invasive CO data obtained by two-dimensional TTE were compared with those from an oscillometric blood pressure device (custo med GmbH, Ottobrunn, Germany) using the integrated algorithm Antares (Redwave Medical GmbH, Jena, Germany). In total, 59 patients undergoing elective cardiac catheterization for clinical reasons (71±10 years old, 76% males) were included. Agreement between both CO measures were assessed by Bland-Altman analysis, Student's t-test, and Pearson correlations.
resultsThe mean difference in CO was 0.04 ± 1.03 l/min (95% confidence interval for the mean difference: -0.23 to 0.30 l/min) for the overall group, with lower and upper limits of agreement at -1.98 and 2.05 l/min, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in means between both CO measures (P = 0.785). Statistically significant correlations between TTE and Antares CO were observed in the entire cohort (r = 0.705, P<0.001) as well as in female (r = 0.802, P<0.001) and male patients (r = 0.669, P<0.001).
conclusionsThe oscillometric PWA algorithm Antares and established TTE for a non-invasive estimation of CO are highly correlated in male and female patients, with no statistically significant difference between both approaches. Future validation studies of the Antares CO are necessary before a clinical application can be considered.
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.