Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output do validation studies really show its clinical reliability 英文参考文献.docVIP

Available online /content/13/2/123 Commentary Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability? Lester AH Critchley Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China Corresponding author: Lester AH Critchley, hcritchley@.hk Published: 4 March 2009 Critical Care 2009, 13:123 (doi:10.118 6/cc7718 ) This article is online at /content/13/2/123 ? 2009 BioMed Central Ltd See related research by Senn et al., /content/13/2/R32 Abstract dynamics, such as blood loss or peripheral vasoconstriction [2,3]. This failure has lead to more favourable reviews when these systems have been validated in the relatively stable haemodynamic setting of postcardiac surgery, but to less The present study was performed to test a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo using head-up–head-down tilting in post- cardiac surgery patients. Impressive improvements in Bland and Altman limits of agreement from 37.5% to 21.6% were recorded. The results, however could be attributed to a failure to produce a wide enough range of test circulatory conditions. A more rigorous test of performance is needed before any real conclusion concern- ing use of the FloTrac/Vigileo in clinical practice can be made. favourable reviews when validated in septic or liver transplant patients, where the circulatory changes are more challenging [3]. The points to note about Senn and colleagues’ study are that updated software (version 1.07) was evaluated, by In the current issue Senn and colleagues present their findings [1] from a study aimed at validating a new version of the FloTrac/Vigileo monitor (Edward Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA), a system that measures cardiac output using the arterial pulse contour method. comparing 25 patients using the ol