• Masato Tsutsui, Tomohisa Mori, Yoshihiko Aramaki, Isao Fukuda, and Tomiei Kazama.
• Department of Anesthesiology, National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa 359-8513.
• Masui. 2004 Aug 1; 53 (8): 929-33.

BackgroundPulseCO (PulseCO) (PulseCO Hemodynamic Monitor, LiDCO Co., London, England) is a low invasive apparatus to measure cardiac output continuously from arterial pulse waveform. CCO (774 HF 75, Edwards Lifescience Co., California, USA) is a continuous cardiac monitor commonly used clinically. The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of these two methods for cardiac output measurement with the thermodilution technique (TDCO) as control.MethodsTo compare the accuracy of PulseCO with that of CCO, six patients with pulmonary-artery catheter inserted were recruited. PulseCO and CCO were measured continuously, and these CO values were compared with TDCO measurements every hour.ResultsCorrelation with TDCO was examined in PulseCO (r=0.82) and CCO (r=0.80).ConclusionsPulseCO was low invasive, and showed a significantly better correlation with TDCO, compared with CCO.

9 keywords...

hide…