Ultrasound Research - Screening, Diagnosis, Pregnancy, Detection

Ultrasound Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Ultrasound, including details on screening, diagnosis, pregnancy, detection.


Ultrasound Research Today

Home

View Latest Issue

Information About Ultrasound

Books on Ultrasound

Advertising in Research Today

View Other Research Today Publications



Cardiac output measurement using the transesophageal Doppler method is less accurate than the thermodilution method when changing PaCO2.

Sawai T, Nohmi T, Ohnishi Y, Takauchi Y, Kuro M

Department of Anesthesiology, Osaka Medical College, 2-7 Daigaku-machi, Takatsuki 569-8686, Japan. ane026@poh.osaka-med.ac.jp

Cardiac output (CO) determination using transesophageal Doppler is based on the measurement of descending aortic blood flow. Because cerebral blood flow is dependent on PaCO2, an increase in PaCO2 would result in an increase of CO because of the increase in cerebral blood flow and vice versa. We enrolled 30 patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery graft surgery in the study. The CO was determined by both transesophageal Doppler and thermodilution while PaCO2 was maintained at either 30 mmHg or 40 mmHg in random order. The CO by thermodilution was significantly higher at PaCO2 of 40 mmHg (4.17 +/- 0.94 L/min) than at 30 mmHg (3.78 +/- 0.85 L/min). On the other hand, there were no significant differences in CO by transesophageal Doppler: 3.85 +/- 0.76 L/min at PaCO2 of 40 mmHg and 3.77 +/- 0.74 at 30 mmHg. Bland-Altman analysis yielded bias and precision of -0.32 and 0.49 L/min at PaCO2 of 40 mmHg, and -0.01 and 0.34 L/min at 30 mmHg. These results indicate that both methods of CO measurement are in agreement at 30 mmHg of PaCO2, but the thermodilution method provides higher values at 40 mmHg of PaCO2.

Published 22 November 2005 in Anesth Analg, 101(6): 1597-601.
Full-text of this article is available online (may require subscription).

Place a permanent text-link or advertisement here for just US$15.

© 2004-2008 Ultrasound Research Today. All Rights Reserved.



Ultrasound Research Today Archive:

Volume 1 (2004)
  Issue 1 (September)
  Issue 2 (October)
  Issue 3 (November)
  Issue 4 (December)

Volume 2 (2005)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 3 (2006)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 4 (2007)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 5 (2008)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)



Ultrasound Books

Digital Radiography and PACS

Digital Radiography and PACS