ReviewJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026
Hemodynamic monitoring: basic principles in operation room and intensive care unit.
Review in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Pressure Injury Risk Assessment Tools for Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Integrated haemodynamic monitoring of fluid responsiveness and fluid tolerance in critical care: from physiology to bedside applications.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Review
- A rare and massive retroperitoneal leiomyoma: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
To synthesize physiological principles and practical monitoring strategies for perioperative and intensive care hemodynamics, addressing two questions: which variables should be monitored, and what targets should be pursued to optimize outcomes. The review is educational in scope and highlights instrumentation details and clinical applications.Narrative, physiology-anchored review of oxygen delivery, venous return (VR), and regulation of mean arterial pressure (MAP) as a derived target. Reviews for educational purposes are included, with emphasis on instrumentation principles and clinical use cases. Invasive and non-invasive modalities are compared. Evidence from goal-directed therapy (GDT) trials in operating room and intensive care contexts is summarized to link physiology with therapy.(1) adequacy of oxygen delivery cannot be judged from MAP alone; MAP reflects the interaction of cardiac output (CO), systemic vascular resistance (SVR), and right atrial pressure. (2) VR depends on effective circulating volume, venous compliance, and mean systemic filling pressure. (3) Microcirculatory assessment remains limited; macrocirculatory surrogates and biomarkers provide guidance but have constraints. (4) Device outputs labeled identically are not interchangeable; calibration strategy and physiological assumptions are decisive. (5) GDT improves processes and may benefit selected high-risk patients, but large trials show mixed effects on mortality.Effective hemodynamic management requires physiology-based reasoning: identify the limiting factor, then select monitoring tools and therapeutic targets accordingly. MAP must be interpreted with CO, SVR, and RAP. Individualized, dynamic targets and trend-based responses outperform fixed thresholds. Embedding ultrasound skills, fluid-responsiveness testing, and calibrated device interpretation are levers to translate monitoring into safer care.
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.