File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1002/lt.21483
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-48949119512
- PMID: 18581504
- WOS: WOS:000257450000019
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Comparison of the USCOM ultrasound cardiac output monitor with pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution in patients undergoing liver transplantation
Title | Comparison of the USCOM ultrasound cardiac output monitor with pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution in patients undergoing liver transplantation |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2008 |
Publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc/106570021 |
Citation | Liver Transplantation, 2008, v. 14 n. 7, p. 1038-1043 How to Cite? |
Abstract | The aim of the study was to compare the standard technique of cardiac output determination by pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution (PAC-TD) with a noninvasive ultrasound Doppler monitor (USCOM Pty., Ltd., Coffs Harbour, Australia) in surgery for liver transplantation. We wished to determine if the degree of accuracy would allow the ultrasound cardiac output monitor (USCOM) to be used as an alternative monitor in a clinical setting in which wide fluctuations in cardiac output could be expected. This was a prospective method comparison study, with 71 paired measurements obtained in 12 patients undergoing liver transplantation in a university teaching hospital. Bland-Altman analysis of the 2 techniques showed a bias of 0.39 L/minute, with the USCOM cardiac output lower compared with that of PAC-TD. The bias was small and did not vary with the magnitude of the cardiac output. The 95% limits of agreement were -1.47 and 2.25 L/minute. There was good repeatability for USCOM measurements, with a repeatability coefficient of 0.43 for USCOM versus 0.77 for PAC-TD. We conclude that USCOM is acceptable for the clinical determination of noninvasive cardiac output, particularly in situations in which tracking changes over time is more important than knowing the precise value. However, the utility of USCOM is limited by its inability to measure pulmonary artery pressure. © 2008 AASLD. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/147259 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 4.7 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.700 |
ISI Accession Number ID | |
References |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Wong, LSG | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Yong, BH | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Young, KK | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Lau, LS | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Cheng, KL | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Man, JSF | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Irwin, MG | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-05-29T06:01:05Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2012-05-29T06:01:05Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Liver Transplantation, 2008, v. 14 n. 7, p. 1038-1043 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1527-6465 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/147259 | - |
dc.description.abstract | The aim of the study was to compare the standard technique of cardiac output determination by pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution (PAC-TD) with a noninvasive ultrasound Doppler monitor (USCOM Pty., Ltd., Coffs Harbour, Australia) in surgery for liver transplantation. We wished to determine if the degree of accuracy would allow the ultrasound cardiac output monitor (USCOM) to be used as an alternative monitor in a clinical setting in which wide fluctuations in cardiac output could be expected. This was a prospective method comparison study, with 71 paired measurements obtained in 12 patients undergoing liver transplantation in a university teaching hospital. Bland-Altman analysis of the 2 techniques showed a bias of 0.39 L/minute, with the USCOM cardiac output lower compared with that of PAC-TD. The bias was small and did not vary with the magnitude of the cardiac output. The 95% limits of agreement were -1.47 and 2.25 L/minute. There was good repeatability for USCOM measurements, with a repeatability coefficient of 0.43 for USCOM versus 0.77 for PAC-TD. We conclude that USCOM is acceptable for the clinical determination of noninvasive cardiac output, particularly in situations in which tracking changes over time is more important than knowing the precise value. However, the utility of USCOM is limited by its inability to measure pulmonary artery pressure. © 2008 AASLD. | en_US |
dc.language | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc/106570021 | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Liver Transplantation | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Adolescent | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Adult | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Aorta - Ultrasonography | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Cardiac Output | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Catheterization, Swan-Ganz | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Female | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Liver Transplantation | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Middle Aged | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Monitoring, Intraoperative - Instrumentation | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Prospective Studies | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Thermodilution | en_US |
dc.title | Comparison of the USCOM ultrasound cardiac output monitor with pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution in patients undergoing liver transplantation | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.email | Irwin, MG:mgirwin@hku.hk | en_US |
dc.identifier.authority | Irwin, MG=rp00390 | en_US |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/lt.21483 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 18581504 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-48949119512 | en_US |
dc.relation.references | http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-48949119512&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpage | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 14 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | 7 | en_US |
dc.identifier.spage | 1038 | en_US |
dc.identifier.epage | 1043 | en_US |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000257450000019 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United States | en_US |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1527-6465 | - |