• Thomas W Felbinger, Daniel A Reuter, Holger K Eltzschig, Karl Moerstedt, Oliver Goedje, and Alwin E Goetz.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Grosshadern Medical Center, University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
• J Clin Anesth. 2002 Jun 1;14(4):296-301.

Study ObjectiveTo compare cardiac index (CI) measurement by arterial pulse contour analysis using two different algorithms (CI(PC), CI(PCnew)) with pulmonary arterial thermodilution values (CI(PA)) so as to evaluate the difference between the conventional algorithm, CI(PC), and a new algorithm, CI(PCnew), that accounts for patients' individual aortic compliance.DesignProspective, clinical study.SettingIntensive care unit of a university hospital.Patients20 ASA physical status II and III patients following elective cardiac surgery.Measurements And Main Results360 parallel triplicate determinations of CI (CI(PA), CI(PC), CI(PCnew)) were performed within a 90-minute period during the immediate postoperative period. Prior to the start of the study period, CI(PC) as well as CI(PCnew) were calibrated by triplicate femoral arterial thermodilution measurements. Regression analysis of CI(PA) and CI(PC), as well as CI(PA) and CI(PCnew), revealed r = 0.89, p < 0.001, and r = 0.93, p < 0.001, respectively. Bland-Altman analysis was used for determining the accuracy and precision of CI(PC) and CI(PCnew) compared with CI(PA). The mean differences (m) and standard deviation (SD) between CI(PA) and CI(PC,) as well as CI(PA) and CI(PCnew), resulted in m = -0.312 L/min/m(2), SD = 0.456 L/min/m(2), and m = - 0.140 L/min/m(2), SD = 0.328 L/min/m(2), respectively.ConclusionArterial pulse contour analysis measurement of CI using either algorithm correlates well with CI values derived by pulmonary arterial thermodilution. However, the algorithm introduced in this study proved to be a more accurate predictor of values as derived by pulmonary artery catheter.

14 keywords...

hide…