Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Poster presentation
  • Open Access

Cardiac output monitoring using the LiDCOplus™ monitor in abdominal aortic surgery: changes in calibration factor in aortic aneurysm disease versus aortic occlusive disease

  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Critical Care201216 (Suppl 1) :P223

https://doi.org/10.1186/cc10830

  • Published:

Keywords

  • Cardiac Output
  • Epidural Analgesia
  • Pulmonary Artery Catheter
  • Calibration Factor
  • Indicator Dilution

Introduction

Monitoring of cardiac output (with subsequent haemodynamic optimisation) may improve outcome after high-risk surgery. The pulmonary artery catheter is still considered the gold standard, but has potential serious complications. Much effort has been put into developing equally good, but less invasive techniques. One of these, the LiDCOplus™ system, uses pulse power analysis to calculate cardiac output and is calibrated by a lithium indicator dilution technique. Since cardiac output is affected by the compliance of the aorta, the LiDCO calculates a calibration factor (CF) each time it is calibrated. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether insertion of aortic prosthetic material would affect aortic compliance and thereby the CF. It was hypothesised that the change in CF would be larger in patients with aortic occlusive disease (AOD) than in patients with aortic aneurysm disease (AAD), since previous studies have shown that these two groups differ considerably on both haemodynamic capacity and their response to aortic cross-clamping [1].

Methods

A prospective study in 51 patients undergoing open elective abdominal aortic surgery - 30 patients with AAD and 21 with AOD. CF values were obtained at baseline, before induction of anaesthesia (T1) and 30 minutes after reperfusion (T2).

Results

AAD patients were older (70 vs. 65 years, P < 0.05), predominantly males (80% vs. 47%), weighed more (80 kg vs. 73 kg, P < 0.1) and preoperative cardiac co-morbidity was more prevalent (43% vs. 14%). No difference was found in the use of epidural analgesia, vasopressors, or inotropes between the groups. At T1, CF was significantly higher for AAD = 0.83 versus AOD = 0.68 (P = 0.01). After reperfusion, T2, there was no significant difference in CF, AAD = 0.86 versus AOD = 0.81 (P = 0.53). The percentage change in CF from T1 to T2 was significantly larger in AOD than in AAD (20% vs. 1.3%) (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Operative insertion of an abdominal aortic prosthesis significantly affects the calibration factor in patients with AOD, indicating an increase in aortic compliance and the need for recalibration of the LiDCOplus™. No significant change was seen in patients with aortic aneurysm disease.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Lillebaelt Hospital, Kolding, Denmark

References

  1. Shteinberg D, et al.: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2000, 20: 462-465. 10.1053/ejvs.2000.1210View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Jørgensen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement