• Klaus Staier, Christoph Wiesenack, Ludwig Günkel, and Cornelius Keyl.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Heart Centre Bad Krozingen, Suedring 15, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
• Can J Anaesth. 2008 Jan 1;55(1):22-8.

PurposeTo compare the accuracy of cardiac output (CO) measurement by arterial pulse waveform analysis (CO(PW)) to thermodilution assessments in patients with aortic stenosis, a high-risk patient group who may benefit from extended hemodynamic monitoring.MethodsIn 30 patients with aortic stenosis, CO was assessed in triplicate by thermodilution via pulmonary artery catheterization (CO(PAC)), and by arterial pulse waveform analysis (CO(PW)), before and after valve replacement. The techniques were compared by assessing the repeatability coefficient of each method and by calculating the percentage error, bias, and the limits of agreement between methods.ResultsThe repeatability coefficients of CO(PAC) and CO(PW) were 0.89 L.min(-1) and 1.04 L.min(-1) respectively after induction of anesthesia, which corresponded to 24% of CO(PAC) and 26% of CO(PW), and increased to 33% of CO(PAC) and 32% of CO(PW) immediately after extracorporeal circulation. A systematic error between methods was not observed. The limits of agreement were bias +/- 1.42 L.min(-1) after anesthesia induction, corresponding to a 36% percentage error. The scattering of differences between methods increased markedly after termination of extracorporeal circulation (percentage error 56%).ConclusionThe repeatability of CO(PAC), as well as of CO(PW), is reduced in patients with aortic stenosis. The repeatability of both methods, as well as the agreement between methods, decreased markedly immediately after termination of cardiopulmonary bypass.

31 keywords...

hide…