Critical care : the official journal of the Critical Care Forum
-
Comparative Study
Influence of passive leg elevation on the right ventricular function in anaesthetized coronary patients.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the haemodynamic effects of passive leg elevation on the right ventricular function in two groups of patients, one with a normal right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) and one with a reduced RVEF. ⋯ We conclude that passive leg elevation caused a worse condition in the right ventricle of group B because, with stable values of cardiac index, of systolic systemic arterial/right ventricular pressure gradient and of diastolic systemic arterial/right ventricular pressure gradient (which supply oxygen), the RVED V/P (to which oxygen consumption is inversely related) markedly decreased. This is as opposed to group A, where the cardiac index, the systolic systemic arterial/right ventricular pressure gradient and the diastolic systemic arterial/right ventricular pressure gradient increased, and the RVED V/P slightly decreased. Passive leg elevation must therefore be performed cautiously in coronary patients with a reduced RVEF.
-
Comparative Study
Comparison of bedside measurement of cardiac output with the thermodilution method and the Fick method in mechanically ventilated patients.
Bedside cardiac output determination is a common preoccupation in the critically ill. All available methods have drawbacks. We wished to re-examine the agreement between cardiac output determined using the thermodilution method (QTTHERM) and cardiac output determined using the metabolic (Fick) method (QTFICK) in patients with extremely severe states, all the more so in the context of changing practices in the management of patients. Indeed, the interchangeability of the methods is a clinically relevant question; for instance, in view of the debate about the risk-benefit balance of right heart catheterization. ⋯ No gold standard is established to measure cardiac output in critically ill patients. The thermodilution method has known limitations that can lead to inaccuracies. The metabolic method also has potential pitfalls in this context, particularly if there is increased oxygen consumption within the lungs. The concordance between the two methods for low cardiac output values suggests that they can both be relied upon for clinical decision making in this context. Conversely, a high cardiac output value is more difficult to rely on in absolute terms.