ArticleESC heart failure2026
Agreement of thermodilution and direct Fick methods for cardiac output across varying haemodynamic conditions.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2026. 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.
- Does the method matter? Direct fick vs thermodilution in the haemodynamic assessment of pulmonary hypertension.ESC heart failure · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe direct Fick method is the gold standard for measuring cardiac output (Q). However, thermodilution (TD) is more widely used in clinical practice due to its feasibility. As the accuracy of TD-derived Q (QTD) may vary by flow state, it can influence the estimation of pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) and pulmonary hypertension (PH) classification. This study aimed to compare QTD with Fick-derived Q (QF) across haemodynamic states and evaluate the clinical reliability of TD-derived PVR (PVRTD).
methodsWe retrospectively analysed 852 right heart catheterizations (2014-22) with simultaneous QTD and QF measurements.
results64% of patients had heart failure, and 20% had pulmonary arterial hypertension. QTD correlated strongly with QF (r = 0.78, P < .001) but demonstrated a flow-dependent bias-overestimating Q in low-flow states (+0.1 L/min) and underestimating it in normal/high flow (-0.48 L/min). Despite this, PVRTD accurately identified elevated PVRF at both 2 and 5 Wood unit thresholds (area under the curve = 0.97, P < .001). Agreement between QTD and QF was unaffected by tricuspid regurgitation severity.
conclusionAlthough TD shows a predictable bias across flow states, it remains a clinically reliable method for estimating elevated PVR. These findings support the clinical utility of TD in PH assessment, while emphasizing the need for direct Fick measurement in low-output states-particularly in patients evaluated for advanced therapies such as transplantation.
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.