- Poster presentation
Monitoring of cardiac output in cardiogenic shock and low-output heart failure: LiDCO vs pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution
Critical Care volume 10, Article number: P337 (2006)
Determination and possibly monitoring of cardiac output (CO) is essential in cardiogenic shock (CS) and low-output heart failure (HF). The value of pulse contour analysis in these patients is unknown.
The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility of LiDCO-pulse contour analysis in patients with CS and HF and to compare LiDCO with the standard pulmonary artery catheter (PAC).
A total of 27 patients (17 male, age 62 ± 13 years, SAPS II 52 ± 19; mechanical ventilation n = 24; CS and HF, group 1, n = 14; control, group 2, n = 13) and a total of 72 measurements were included (a mean of 2.17 consecutive measurements/patient). The CO was measured using PAC and LiDCO simultaneously in all patients. The LiDCO was calibrated according to the manufacturer.
CO-PAC and CO-LiDCO showed a significant correlation (r = 0.66, P = 0.001) for the group as a whole. The correlation was lower in group 1 (r = 0.45, P = 0.004) vs group 2 (r = 0.58, P = 0.001). There was good agreement between the two methods for the entire group (mean difference 0.086, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.47). Respective values were 0.08 (95% CI -0.37 to 0.54) for group 1 and 0.09 (95% CI -0.58 to 0.7) for group 2.
There was a somewhat lower correlation between CO-PAC and CO-LiDCO in patients with CS and HF when compared with controls. From a clinical standpoint, agreement between the two methods was fairly good.
About this article
Cite this article
Meyer, B., Delle Karth, G., Bartok, A. et al. Monitoring of cardiac output in cardiogenic shock and low-output heart failure: LiDCO vs pulmonary artery catheter thermodilution. Crit Care 10 (Suppl 1), P337 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1186/cc4684