Skip to main content
  • Poster presentation
  • Open access
  • Published:

Techniques to measure cardiac output: minimally invasive method versus thermodilution


Hemodynamic monitoring is important to manage critically ill patients. The thermodilution pulmonary catheter is considered the gold standard; however, it is invasive and associated with the onset of complications. Our study compared cardiac output (CO) obtained with the MostCare (COMC), which uses the pressure recording analytical method, to CO obtained with a Swan-Ganz (COSG) catheter in hemodynamically unstable patients.


We conducted a prospective clinical study in our cardiosurgical ICU. Sixteen post-cardiosurgical adult patients were enrolled. They had a Swan-Ganz catheter and were mechanically ventilated. The Swan-Ganz catheter was connected to the monitor Vigilance Edwards®, while the MostCare was connected to the patient's artery. For each patient three measurements of CO have been carried out and the mean was considered for statistical analysis. The correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman test and percentage of error were measured.


The correlation coefficient between COSG and COMC was 0.824 (0.567 to 0.935, 95% CI; P < 0.001) The Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference between the two methods (bias) of 0.22 ± 0.55 l/minute/m2 with lower and upper 95% limits of confidence of -0.87 and 1.30 l/minute/m2 respectively. The percentage of error was of 25%.


This study demonstrated a good correlation between the two methods. MostCare is resulted to be reliable and accurate even in hemodynamically unstable patients. It would be interesting to study the new device before and after having modified the therapy, such as fluid challenge or inotropic therapy or the use of vasopressors.


  1. Zangrillo A, et al.: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2010, 24: 265-269. 10.1053/j.jvca.2009.09.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Scolletta S, et al.: Br J Anaesth. 2005, 95: 159-165. 10.1093/bja/aei154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Romano SM, et al.: Crit Care Med. 2002, 30: 1834-1841. 10.1097/00003246-200208000-00027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Donati, A., Tondi, S., Carsetti, A. et al. Techniques to measure cardiac output: minimally invasive method versus thermodilution. Crit Care 16 (Suppl 1), P216 (2012).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: