• Burtman David T M DTM Department of Anaesthesiology, Institute for Cardiovascular Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Annick Stolze, Selma E Kaffka Genaamd Dengler, Vonk Alexander B A ABA Department of Cardio-thoracic Surgery, Institute for Cardiovascular Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., and Christa Boer.
• Department of Anaesthesiology, Institute for Cardiovascular Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2018 Jun 1; 32 (3): 1266-1272.

ObjectiveEvaluate minimally invasive assessment of oxygen delivery (DO2) and oxygen consumption (VO2) and determine its level of agreement with the gold standard approach of those measurements in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.DesignObservational study.SettingSingle center, VU University Medical Center (Amsterdam, The Netherlands).ParticipantsThe study comprised 29 adult patients.InterventionParallel measurements of invasive and minimally invasive parameters required for the calculation of DO2 and VO2.Measurements And Main ResultsMeasurements were performed after anesthesia induction (T1) and before sternal closure (T2) in adult cardiac surgery. The invasive approach included arterial and pulmonary artery catheter-derived blood sampling and cardiac output measurements. The minimally invasive approach included pulse oximetry, point-of-care hemoglobin, Nexfin-based cardiac output, and central venous catheter-derived blood sampling. Level of agreement was determined using Bland-Altman analysis and percentage error. DO2 and VO2 levels were determined in patients 71 ± 8 years old. DO2 measurements showed a level of agreement of -17 ± 57 L/min/m2 and -18 ± 72 L/min/m2 with percentage errors of 35% and 38% at T1 and T2, respectively. VO2 assessment showed a level of agreement of -5 ± 18 L/min/m2 and -12 ± 22 L/min/m2, with percentage errors of 47% at T1 and T2. The highest percentage errors were for cardiac output measurements, 33% and 28% at T1 and T2, respectively.ConclusionAgreement between minimally invasive and invasive DO2 and VO2 determinations is, moderate and poor, respectively. These findings may be explained by the poor agreement between minimally invasive and invasive cardiac output measurements.Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

15 keywords...

hide…