重症患者颈动脉多普勒超声和超声心动图与有创心输出量测量的相关性和一致性。

IF 2.8 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
María Camila Arango-Granados, Jaime Andrés Quintero-Ramírez, Felipe Mejía-Herrera, Lina Mayerly Henao-Cardona, Valentina Muñoz-Patiño, Luis Alfonso Bustamante-Cristancho
{"title":"重症患者颈动脉多普勒超声和超声心动图与有创心输出量测量的相关性和一致性。","authors":"María Camila Arango-Granados, Jaime Andrés Quintero-Ramírez, Felipe Mejía-Herrera, Lina Mayerly Henao-Cardona, Valentina Muñoz-Patiño, Luis Alfonso Bustamante-Cristancho","doi":"10.1186/s40635-024-00653-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Critical care management heavily relies on accurate cardiac output (CO) measurement. Echocardiography has been a mainstay in non-invasive cardiac monitoring; however, its comparability to invasive methods warrants further exploration. Recent studies have suggested the potential of carotid Doppler measurements as a promising approach to estimate CO. Despite this potential, the literature presents mixed outcomes regarding its reliability and accuracy. This study aims to evaluate the correlation and concordance between carotid Doppler ultrasonography and invasive hemodynamic monitoring in estimating CO in critically ill patients. Furthermore, it assesses the concordance and correlation between echocardiography CO and the standard invasive CO measurements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This concordance study involved critically ill adults requiring invasive CO measurement. Patients with arrhythmias, severe valvulopathy, pregnancy, and poor acoustic window were excluded. Statistical analyses comprised univariate analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman correlation, and intraclass correlation coefficient. Ethical approval was granted by the institution's ethics committee.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 49 critically ill patients were included, predominantly male (63.27%), with a median age of 57 years. Diagnoses included subarachnoid hemorrhage (53.06%) and heart failure (8.16%). Mean cardiac index was 3.36 ± 0.81 L/min/m<sup>2</sup> and mean cardiac output was 5.98 ± 1.47 L/min. Spearman correlation coefficient between echocardiography and invasive CO measurements was 0.58 (p-value = p < 0.001), with an ICC of 0.59 for CO and 0.52 for cardiac index. Carotid measurements displayed no significant correlation with invasive CO.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a moderate correlation and concordance between echocardiography and invasive CO measurements. There is no significant correlation between carotid variables and invasive CO, underscoring the necessity for cautious interpretation and application, particularly in patients with distinctive cerebral blood flow dynamics.</p>","PeriodicalId":13750,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental","volume":"12 1","pages":"69"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11319701/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correlation and concordance of carotid Doppler ultrasound and echocardiography with invasive cardiac output measurement in critically ill patients.\",\"authors\":\"María Camila Arango-Granados, Jaime Andrés Quintero-Ramírez, Felipe Mejía-Herrera, Lina Mayerly Henao-Cardona, Valentina Muñoz-Patiño, Luis Alfonso Bustamante-Cristancho\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40635-024-00653-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Critical care management heavily relies on accurate cardiac output (CO) measurement. Echocardiography has been a mainstay in non-invasive cardiac monitoring; however, its comparability to invasive methods warrants further exploration. Recent studies have suggested the potential of carotid Doppler measurements as a promising approach to estimate CO. Despite this potential, the literature presents mixed outcomes regarding its reliability and accuracy. This study aims to evaluate the correlation and concordance between carotid Doppler ultrasonography and invasive hemodynamic monitoring in estimating CO in critically ill patients. Furthermore, it assesses the concordance and correlation between echocardiography CO and the standard invasive CO measurements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This concordance study involved critically ill adults requiring invasive CO measurement. Patients with arrhythmias, severe valvulopathy, pregnancy, and poor acoustic window were excluded. Statistical analyses comprised univariate analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman correlation, and intraclass correlation coefficient. Ethical approval was granted by the institution's ethics committee.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 49 critically ill patients were included, predominantly male (63.27%), with a median age of 57 years. Diagnoses included subarachnoid hemorrhage (53.06%) and heart failure (8.16%). Mean cardiac index was 3.36 ± 0.81 L/min/m<sup>2</sup> and mean cardiac output was 5.98 ± 1.47 L/min. Spearman correlation coefficient between echocardiography and invasive CO measurements was 0.58 (p-value = p < 0.001), with an ICC of 0.59 for CO and 0.52 for cardiac index. Carotid measurements displayed no significant correlation with invasive CO.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a moderate correlation and concordance between echocardiography and invasive CO measurements. There is no significant correlation between carotid variables and invasive CO, underscoring the necessity for cautious interpretation and application, particularly in patients with distinctive cerebral blood flow dynamics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13750,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"69\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11319701/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-024-00653-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-024-00653-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:重症监护管理在很大程度上依赖于准确的心输出量(CO)测量。超声心动图一直是无创心脏监测的主流,但其与有创方法的可比性仍有待进一步探讨。最近的研究表明,颈动脉多普勒测量是一种很有潜力的估算 CO 的方法。尽管这种方法很有潜力,但有关其可靠性和准确性的文献报道却褒贬不一。本研究旨在评估颈动脉多普勒超声检查和有创血流动力学监测在估计重症患者 CO 方面的相关性和一致性。此外,该研究还评估了超声心动图 CO 与标准有创 CO 测量之间的一致性和相关性:这项一致性研究涉及需要进行有创二氧化碳测量的成人重症患者。排除了心律失常、严重瓣膜病、妊娠和声窗不佳的患者。统计分析包括单变量分析、Wilcoxon符号秩检验、Spearman相关性和类内相关系数。该机构的伦理委员会已批准该研究:共纳入 49 名重症患者,其中男性占多数(63.27%),中位年龄为 57 岁。诊断包括蛛网膜下腔出血(53.06%)和心力衰竭(8.16%)。平均心脏指数为 3.36 ± 0.81 升/分钟/平方米,平均心输出量为 5.98 ± 1.47 升/分钟。超声心动图和有创 CO 测量之间的 Spearman 相关系数为 0.58(P 值 = p 结论):超声心动图和有创 CO 测量之间存在中等程度的相关性和一致性。颈动脉变量与有创二氧化碳之间没有明显的相关性,这突出表明有必要谨慎解释和应用,尤其是对具有独特脑血流动力学的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Correlation and concordance of carotid Doppler ultrasound and echocardiography with invasive cardiac output measurement in critically ill patients.

Background: Critical care management heavily relies on accurate cardiac output (CO) measurement. Echocardiography has been a mainstay in non-invasive cardiac monitoring; however, its comparability to invasive methods warrants further exploration. Recent studies have suggested the potential of carotid Doppler measurements as a promising approach to estimate CO. Despite this potential, the literature presents mixed outcomes regarding its reliability and accuracy. This study aims to evaluate the correlation and concordance between carotid Doppler ultrasonography and invasive hemodynamic monitoring in estimating CO in critically ill patients. Furthermore, it assesses the concordance and correlation between echocardiography CO and the standard invasive CO measurements.

Methods: This concordance study involved critically ill adults requiring invasive CO measurement. Patients with arrhythmias, severe valvulopathy, pregnancy, and poor acoustic window were excluded. Statistical analyses comprised univariate analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman correlation, and intraclass correlation coefficient. Ethical approval was granted by the institution's ethics committee.

Results: A total of 49 critically ill patients were included, predominantly male (63.27%), with a median age of 57 years. Diagnoses included subarachnoid hemorrhage (53.06%) and heart failure (8.16%). Mean cardiac index was 3.36 ± 0.81 L/min/m2 and mean cardiac output was 5.98 ± 1.47 L/min. Spearman correlation coefficient between echocardiography and invasive CO measurements was 0.58 (p-value = p < 0.001), with an ICC of 0.59 for CO and 0.52 for cardiac index. Carotid measurements displayed no significant correlation with invasive CO.

Conclusion: There is a moderate correlation and concordance between echocardiography and invasive CO measurements. There is no significant correlation between carotid variables and invasive CO, underscoring the necessity for cautious interpretation and application, particularly in patients with distinctive cerebral blood flow dynamics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
48
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信