{"title":"血流动力学监测三十年(1995-2025):从侵入性压力血流动力学分析到功能生理学。","authors":"Michael R Pinsky","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Hemodynamic monitoring has undergone a profound transformation over the last 30 years. The field has transitioned from the \"standard of care\" invasive pulmonary artery catheterization (PAC) toward minimally invasive and noninvasive technologies. This evolution is characterized by a shift in clinical philosophy.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A very strong shift away from the measurement of static pressures and flow defining specific hemodynamic profiles to the assessment of functional physiology and fluid responsiveness characterize the main changes in hemodynamic monitoring over this time interval. This review summarizes the four main milestones, the evidence-based \"PAC-wars\" and the \"Great debate\" (1995-2005); the shift to functional hemodynamics and more precise resuscitation (2005-2015), through the rise of goal-directed therapy (GDT) and protocolization based on patient subgroups (2010-2020); to the present where the focus is on noninvasive monitoring, using artificial intelligence (AI) to plumb biosignatures from time series data and focusing on tissue perfusion and end-organ function (2020-2025).</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The use of hemodynamic monitoring to plumb bedside cardiopulmonary status and monitor responses to therapy with the goal of precise and personalized resuscitation focusing on end-organ recovery using advanced minimally-invasive and on-invasive monitors coupled with AI-aided physiological pattern recognition represents the pathway we are on.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":"269-274"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Three decades of hemodynamic monitoring (1995-2025): from invasive pressure based hemodynamic profiling to functional physiology.\",\"authors\":\"Michael R Pinsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Hemodynamic monitoring has undergone a profound transformation over the last 30 years. The field has transitioned from the \\\"standard of care\\\" invasive pulmonary artery catheterization (PAC) toward minimally invasive and noninvasive technologies. This evolution is characterized by a shift in clinical philosophy.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A very strong shift away from the measurement of static pressures and flow defining specific hemodynamic profiles to the assessment of functional physiology and fluid responsiveness characterize the main changes in hemodynamic monitoring over this time interval. This review summarizes the four main milestones, the evidence-based \\\"PAC-wars\\\" and the \\\"Great debate\\\" (1995-2005); the shift to functional hemodynamics and more precise resuscitation (2005-2015), through the rise of goal-directed therapy (GDT) and protocolization based on patient subgroups (2010-2020); to the present where the focus is on noninvasive monitoring, using artificial intelligence (AI) to plumb biosignatures from time series data and focusing on tissue perfusion and end-organ function (2020-2025).</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The use of hemodynamic monitoring to plumb bedside cardiopulmonary status and monitor responses to therapy with the goal of precise and personalized resuscitation focusing on end-organ recovery using advanced minimally-invasive and on-invasive monitors coupled with AI-aided physiological pattern recognition represents the pathway we are on.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"269-274\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001384\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/4/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001384","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Three decades of hemodynamic monitoring (1995-2025): from invasive pressure based hemodynamic profiling to functional physiology.
Purpose of review: Hemodynamic monitoring has undergone a profound transformation over the last 30 years. The field has transitioned from the "standard of care" invasive pulmonary artery catheterization (PAC) toward minimally invasive and noninvasive technologies. This evolution is characterized by a shift in clinical philosophy.
Recent findings: A very strong shift away from the measurement of static pressures and flow defining specific hemodynamic profiles to the assessment of functional physiology and fluid responsiveness characterize the main changes in hemodynamic monitoring over this time interval. This review summarizes the four main milestones, the evidence-based "PAC-wars" and the "Great debate" (1995-2005); the shift to functional hemodynamics and more precise resuscitation (2005-2015), through the rise of goal-directed therapy (GDT) and protocolization based on patient subgroups (2010-2020); to the present where the focus is on noninvasive monitoring, using artificial intelligence (AI) to plumb biosignatures from time series data and focusing on tissue perfusion and end-organ function (2020-2025).
Summary: The use of hemodynamic monitoring to plumb bedside cardiopulmonary status and monitor responses to therapy with the goal of precise and personalized resuscitation focusing on end-organ recovery using advanced minimally-invasive and on-invasive monitors coupled with AI-aided physiological pattern recognition represents the pathway we are on.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.