• W Buhre, A Weyland, S Kazmaier, G G Hanekop, M M Baryalei, M Sydow, and H Sonntag.
• Zentrum Anaesthesiologie, Rettungs-und Intensivmedizin der Universität Göttingen, and the Klinik und Poliklinik für HerzThroax- und Gefässchirurgie der Universität Göttingen, Germany.
• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 1999 Aug 1;13(4):437-40.

ObjectiveTo investigate the precision and accuracy of continuous pulse contour cardiac output (PCCO) compared with intermittent transcardiopulmonary (TCPCO) and pulmonary artery thermodilution (TDCO) measurements in patients undergoing minimally invasive coronary bypass surgery (MIDCAB).DesignProspective, controlled, clinical study.SettingUniversity hospital.ParticipantsTwelve patients undergoing MIDCAB.InterventionsThirty-six measurements of PCCO and thermodilution cardiac output (CO) were simultaneously performed after the start of surgery, during bypass grafting, and at the end of surgery. TCPCO and TDCO were simultaneously assessed by three injections of ice-cold saline randomly spread over the respiratory cycle. The pulse contour device was initially calibrated with an additional set of aortic thermodilution measurements.Measurements And Main ResultsAbsolute values of CO ranged between 1.6 and 9.2 L/min. A close agreement among the three techniques was observed at all measurements. Mean bias between PCCO and TDCO and TCPCO was 0.003 L/min (2 SD of differences between methods = 1.26 L/min) and 0.27 L/min (2 SD of differences between methods = 1.16 L/min), respectively. The correlation coefficients were r2 = 0.90 for TCPCO versus PCCO and r2 = 0.88 for TDCO versus PCCO.ConclusionThe results of the present study show that compared with thermodilution CO, pulse contour analysis enables accurate measurement of continuous CO in patients undergoing MIDCAB.

15 keywords...

hide…