腹部手术改变了生物阻抗心输出量测量的校准。

L A Critchley, D H Leung, T G Short
{"title":"腹部手术改变了生物阻抗心输出量测量的校准。","authors":"L A Critchley,&nbsp;D H Leung,&nbsp;T G Short","doi":"10.1007/BF02918206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The performance of impedance cardiography (TEBco), using the BoMed NCCOM3-R7S, and thermodilution (TDco) were compared in eight patients during major abdominal surgery. An opioid, volatile and relaxant anaesthetic technique was employed. This was supplemented with an epidural in five cases. Sets of three cardiac output readings, for both methods, were made at 10-20 min intervals throughout surgery. Data were compared using the Bland and Altman method, regression analysis and a nested model to measure variance components at different stages of surgery. Data from 157 sets of readings are presented. Agreement between the two devices was poor, with a ratio of TDco/TEBco of 115% and limits of agreement of 51-193%. The regression line was TDco = (0.98) x TEBco-0.95 with r = 0.60. A more detailed analysis, using nested data, showed good repeatability with coefficients of variation of 5.4% for TDco and 4.8% for TEBco. During surgery shifts in the bias between the two devices occurred, which were related to changes in surgical conditions. Between shifts both devices showed good repeatability over time. Variance components were 0.27 within nested data and 0.082 between bias shifts, with a significantly greater overall component of 1.2 (ANOVA; P = 0.0001). Shifts could be explained by deficiencies in the algorithm used to calculate TEBco. Current TEBco technology is too inaccurate for intra-operative use. However, under stable operating conditions TEBco and TDco showed good repeatability.</p>","PeriodicalId":77181,"journal":{"name":"International journal of clinical monitoring and computing","volume":"13 1","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF02918206","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abdominal surgery alters the calibration of bioimpedance cardiac output measurement.\",\"authors\":\"L A Critchley,&nbsp;D H Leung,&nbsp;T G Short\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/BF02918206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The performance of impedance cardiography (TEBco), using the BoMed NCCOM3-R7S, and thermodilution (TDco) were compared in eight patients during major abdominal surgery. An opioid, volatile and relaxant anaesthetic technique was employed. This was supplemented with an epidural in five cases. Sets of three cardiac output readings, for both methods, were made at 10-20 min intervals throughout surgery. Data were compared using the Bland and Altman method, regression analysis and a nested model to measure variance components at different stages of surgery. Data from 157 sets of readings are presented. Agreement between the two devices was poor, with a ratio of TDco/TEBco of 115% and limits of agreement of 51-193%. The regression line was TDco = (0.98) x TEBco-0.95 with r = 0.60. A more detailed analysis, using nested data, showed good repeatability with coefficients of variation of 5.4% for TDco and 4.8% for TEBco. During surgery shifts in the bias between the two devices occurred, which were related to changes in surgical conditions. Between shifts both devices showed good repeatability over time. Variance components were 0.27 within nested data and 0.082 between bias shifts, with a significantly greater overall component of 1.2 (ANOVA; P = 0.0001). Shifts could be explained by deficiencies in the algorithm used to calculate TEBco. Current TEBco technology is too inaccurate for intra-operative use. However, under stable operating conditions TEBco and TDco showed good repeatability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77181,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of clinical monitoring and computing\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF02918206\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of clinical monitoring and computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02918206\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of clinical monitoring and computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02918206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

采用BoMed NCCOM3-R7S进行阻抗心动图(TEBco)和热稀释(TDco)对8例腹部大手术患者的表现进行比较。采用阿片类药物、挥发性松弛麻醉技术。其中5例辅以硬膜外麻醉。两种方法的三组心输出量读数,在手术过程中每隔10-20分钟进行一次。数据比较采用Bland和Altman方法,回归分析和嵌套模型测量不同手术阶段的方差成分。给出了157组读数的数据。两种设备的一致性较差,TDco/TEBco比值为115%,一致性限为51-193%。回归线为TDco = (0.98) × TEBco-0.95, r = 0.60。使用嵌套数据进行更详细的分析,结果表明TDco的变异系数为5.4%,TEBco的变异系数为4.8%,重复性良好。在手术过程中,两种装置之间的偏置发生了变化,这与手术条件的变化有关。在轮班之间,两种设备都显示出良好的重复性。嵌套数据内的方差成分为0.27,偏差移位之间的方差成分为0.082,总体方差成分显著大于1.2(方差分析;P = 0.0001)。移位可以用计算TEBco的算法中的缺陷来解释。目前的TEBco技术在术中应用过于不准确。在稳定的操作条件下,TEBco和TDco具有良好的重复性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Abdominal surgery alters the calibration of bioimpedance cardiac output measurement.

The performance of impedance cardiography (TEBco), using the BoMed NCCOM3-R7S, and thermodilution (TDco) were compared in eight patients during major abdominal surgery. An opioid, volatile and relaxant anaesthetic technique was employed. This was supplemented with an epidural in five cases. Sets of three cardiac output readings, for both methods, were made at 10-20 min intervals throughout surgery. Data were compared using the Bland and Altman method, regression analysis and a nested model to measure variance components at different stages of surgery. Data from 157 sets of readings are presented. Agreement between the two devices was poor, with a ratio of TDco/TEBco of 115% and limits of agreement of 51-193%. The regression line was TDco = (0.98) x TEBco-0.95 with r = 0.60. A more detailed analysis, using nested data, showed good repeatability with coefficients of variation of 5.4% for TDco and 4.8% for TEBco. During surgery shifts in the bias between the two devices occurred, which were related to changes in surgical conditions. Between shifts both devices showed good repeatability over time. Variance components were 0.27 within nested data and 0.082 between bias shifts, with a significantly greater overall component of 1.2 (ANOVA; P = 0.0001). Shifts could be explained by deficiencies in the algorithm used to calculate TEBco. Current TEBco technology is too inaccurate for intra-operative use. However, under stable operating conditions TEBco and TDco showed good repeatability.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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