Comparison of Cardiac Output Measurement Techniques: Thermodilution Versus Biventricular Pressure-Volume Loop Recordings in Pigs.

IF 2.2 4区医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

Heart, Lung and Circulation Pub Date : 2025-08-18 DOI:10.1016/j.hlc.2025.05.080

Simone Juel Dragsbaek, Mathilde Emilie Kirk, Cecilie Dahl Baltsen, Asger Andersen, Mads Dam Lyhne

{"title":"Comparison of Cardiac Output Measurement Techniques: Thermodilution Versus Biventricular Pressure-Volume Loop Recordings in Pigs.","authors":"Simone Juel Dragsbaek, Mathilde Emilie Kirk, Cecilie Dahl Baltsen, Asger Andersen, Mads Dam Lyhne","doi":"10.1016/j.hlc.2025.05.080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Cardiac output (CO) measurement is crucial in cardiovascular research. Pressure-volume (PV) loop recordings provide detailed information on cardiac function, including CO. This study aimed to compare CO measurements obtained from biventricular PV loop recordings with thermodilution (TD) as a reference method in pigs.Method: The TD-CO was measured by right heart catheterisation. The PV-derived CO was obtained from both ventricles simultaneously, both during ongoing ventilation and in transient apnoea. Data were compared using the Bland-Altman method. The percentage error (PE%) and linear regression were calculated between the TD-CO and PV-derived CO.Results: Simultaneous CO measurements from 43 pigs were analysed. Compared to thermodilution, the lowest bias was found in PV-derived CO from the left ventricle during ongoing ventilation (0.02 L/min, 95% confidence interval [0.2-0.3]) with a PE% of 30% during ongoing ventilation. The highest bias was found in PV-derived CO from the right ventricle during ongoing ventilation (0.9 L/min, 95% CI [0.5-1.3]) with a PE% of 67% during ongoing ventilation.Conclusions: PV-derived CO from the left ventricle showed very good agreement with TD-CO, with minimal bias, while PV-CO measurements from the right ventricle showed higher inaccuracy, likely due to anatomical differences between the ventricles.","PeriodicalId":13000,"journal":{"name":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2025.05.080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cardiac output (CO) measurement is crucial in cardiovascular research. Pressure-volume (PV) loop recordings provide detailed information on cardiac function, including CO. This study aimed to compare CO measurements obtained from biventricular PV loop recordings with thermodilution (TD) as a reference method in pigs.

Method: The TD-CO was measured by right heart catheterisation. The PV-derived CO was obtained from both ventricles simultaneously, both during ongoing ventilation and in transient apnoea. Data were compared using the Bland-Altman method. The percentage error (PE%) and linear regression were calculated between the TD-CO and PV-derived CO.

Results: Simultaneous CO measurements from 43 pigs were analysed. Compared to thermodilution, the lowest bias was found in PV-derived CO from the left ventricle during ongoing ventilation (0.02 L/min, 95% confidence interval [0.2-0.3]) with a PE% of 30% during ongoing ventilation. The highest bias was found in PV-derived CO from the right ventricle during ongoing ventilation (0.9 L/min, 95% CI [0.5-1.3]) with a PE% of 67% during ongoing ventilation.

Conclusions: PV-derived CO from the left ventricle showed very good agreement with TD-CO, with minimal bias, while PV-CO measurements from the right ventricle showed higher inaccuracy, likely due to anatomical differences between the ventricles.

查看原文本刊更多论文

心输出量测量技术的比较：猪的热稀释与双心室压力-容量环路记录。

背景：心输出量（CO）测量在心血管研究中至关重要。压力-体积（PV）环路记录提供了包括CO在内的心功能的详细信息。本研究旨在比较猪双心室PV环路记录和热稀释（TD）作为参考方法获得的CO测量值。方法：采用右心导管法测定TD-CO。在持续通气和短暂性呼吸暂停期间，pv衍生的CO同时从两个心室获得。数据比较采用Bland-Altman方法。计算了TD-CO和pv -CO之间的百分比误差（PE%）和线性回归。结果：分析了43头猪同时测量的CO。与热稀释相比，持续通气期间左心室pv衍生CO的偏差最低（0.02 L/min， 95%可信区间[0.2-0.3]），持续通气期间PE%为30%。在持续通气期间，来自右心室的pv衍生CO偏差最大（0.9 L/min, 95% CI[0.5-1.3]），在持续通气期间PE%为67%。结论：左心室PV-CO测量结果与TD-CO测量结果非常吻合，偏差很小，而右心室PV-CO测量结果的不准确性较高，可能是由于两心室解剖结构的差异。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Heart, Lung and Circulation CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

3.80%

发文量

912

审稿时长

11.9 weeks

期刊介绍： Heart, Lung and Circulation publishes articles integrating clinical and research activities in the fields of basic cardiovascular science, clinical cardiology and cardiac surgery, with a focus on emerging issues in cardiovascular disease. The journal promotes multidisciplinary dialogue between cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, cardio-pulmonary physicians and cardiovascular scientists.