Skip to content


  • Poster presentation
  • Open Access

Continuous arterial pulse cardiac output validation in hyperdynamic conditions

  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Critical Care200610 (Suppl 1) :P324

  • Published:


  • Cardiac Output
  • Cardiac Index
  • Body Surface Area
  • Cirrhotic Patient
  • Radial Artery


Assessment of continuous cardiac output using the arterial pulse cardiac index (APCI) is nowadays available also with only standard radial artery catheterization with a transducer (Vigileo System, FloTrac; Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) [1][2]. It does not require calibration (thermodilution or any) but rather bases its calculations on arterial waveform characteristics in conjunction with patient demographic data. The aim of the study was to assess the level of agreement between a continuous APCI and continuous cardiac index (CCI) and intermittent cardiac index (ICI) obtained with a pulmonary artery catheter (Intellicath) in cirrhotic patients with hyperdynamic conditions.


Hemodynamic measurements were obtained in 14 liver-transplanted patients. ICI measurements were collected after ICU admission and every 8 hours until the 48th postoperative hour. Continuous data were collected every hour after ICU admission to the 48th postoperative hour. Statistical analysis was performed using the method described by Bland and Altman. Statistical significance was considered P < 0.05.


Data are presented standardized by body surface area. The mean difference between APCI–ICI (bias ± 2SD) was 0.48 ± 1.40 l/min/m2 together with 95% confidence intervals of -0.92 to 1.88 l/min/m2. The mean difference between APCI–CCI (bias ± 2SD) was 0.90 ± 1.49 l/min/m2 together with 95% confidence intervals of -0.59 to 2.39 l/min/m2.


APCI obtained with the Vigileo System provided comparable measurements of cardiac output in hyperdynamic conditions. Larger population studies are needed to confirm these preliminary data.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Authors’ Affiliations

University of Udine, Italy


  1. J Cardiothoracic Vasc Anesth. 2004, 18: 185-189. 10.1053/j.jvca.2004.01.025Google Scholar
  2. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2005, 2: 523-527. 10.1586/17434440.2.5.523Google Scholar


© BioMed Central Ltd 2006