Abstract

BackgroundSingle-lumen 4Fr or double-lumen 5Fr power injectable peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are not accurate for trans-pulmonary thermodilution (TPTD), since they overestimate cardiac index and other TPTD-derived parameters when compared with centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) because of the smaller size of their lumen. We hypothesize that PICCs with larger lumen size may be reliable for the cardiac index assessment using the TPTD.MethodsThis is a single-centre, prospective method–comparison study that included adult patients admitted in ICU who required a calibrated Pulse Contour hemodynamic monitoring system (VolumeView/EV1000™) for circulatory shock and had both PICC and CICC in place. We compared TPTD measurements via single-lumen 5Fr or triple-lumen 6Fr polyurethane power injectable PICCs with triple-lumen 7Fr CICC (reference standard). To rule out biases related to manual injection, measurements were repeated using an automated rapid injection system. We performed Bland–Altman analysis accounting for multiple observations per patient.ResultsA total of 320 measurements were performed in 15 patients. During the manual phase, the cardiac index measured with either single-lumen 5Fr or triple-lumen 6Fr PICCs were comparable with cardiac index measured with triple-lumen 7Fr CICC (3.2 ± 1.04 vs. 3.2 ± 1.06 L/min/m2, bias 2.2% and 3.3 ± 0.8 vs. 3.0 ± 0.7 L/min/m2, bias 8.5%, respectively). During the automated phase, triple-lumen 6Fr PICC slightly overestimated the cardiac index when compared to triple-lumen 7Fr CICC (CI 3.4 ± 0.7 vs. 3.0 ± 0.7 L/min/m2, bias 12.5%; p = 0.012). For both single-lumen 5Fr and triple-lumen 6Fr PICCs, percentage error vs. triple-lumen 7Fr CICC was below 20% (14.7% and 19% during the manual phase and 14.4% and 13.8% during the automated phase, respectively). Similar results were observed for TPTD-derived parameters.ConclusionsDuring hemodynamic monitoring with TPTD, both single-lumen 5Fr PICCs and triple-lumen 6Fr PICCs can be used for cold fluid bolus injection as an alternative to CICC (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04241926).

Highlights

  • Single-lumen 4Fr or double-lumen 5Fr power injectable peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are not accurate for trans-pulmonary thermodilution (TPTD), since they overestimate cardiac index and other TPTDderived parameters when compared with centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) because of the smaller size of their lumen

  • In a previous study from our group [7] we found that cold fluid bolus injection through a single-lumen 4Fr or a double-lumen 5Fr PICC for TPTD using VolumeView/ EV1000TM significantly overestimated cardiac index (CI) and other TPTD-derived measures when compared with injection through the distal lumen of a 7Fr CICC

  • Five were excluded because of contraindication to PICC placement, two were excluded because of contraindication to CICC placement, and three were excluded because of Automated rapid injector phase For single-lumen 5Fr PICC, the automated rapid injector phase confirmed the lack of any significant difference with triple-lumen 7Fr CICC for all hemodynamic variables (CI, global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI), EVLWI, stroke volume index (SVI)) and ΔT (Table 4)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Single-lumen 4Fr or double-lumen 5Fr power injectable peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are not accurate for trans-pulmonary thermodilution (TPTD), since they overestimate cardiac index and other TPTDderived parameters when compared with centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) because of the smaller size of their lumen. Power injectable polyurethane peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) allow high-speed fluid infusion (up to 3–5 mL/s), which makes them potentially suitable for cold fluid bolus injection during trans-pulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). In a previous study from our group [7] we found that cold fluid bolus injection through a single-lumen 4Fr or a double-lumen 5Fr PICC for TPTD using VolumeView/ EV1000TM significantly overestimated cardiac index (CI) and other TPTD-derived measures when compared with injection through the distal lumen of a 7Fr CICC. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether triple-lumen 6Fr or single-lumen 5Fr PICCs could be as accurate as 7Fr CICCs (standard reference) for hemodynamic measurements with TPTD using the VolumeView/EV1000TM system

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call