Abstract

BackgroundNon-invasive measures that can accurately estimate cardiac output may help identify volume-responsive patients. This study seeks to compare two non-invasive measures (corrected carotid flow time and carotid blood flow) and their correlations with invasive reference measurements of cardiac output. Consenting adult patients (n = 51) at Massachusetts General Hospital cardiac catheterization laboratory undergoing right heart catheterization between February and April 2016 were included. Carotid ultrasound images were obtained concurrently with cardiac output measurements, obtained by the thermodilution method in the absence of severe tricuspid regurgitation and by the Fick oxygen method otherwise. Corrected carotid flow time was calculated as systole time/√cycle time. Carotid blood flow was calculated as π × (carotid diameter)2/4 × velocity time integral × heart rate. Measurements were obtained using a single carotid waveform and an average of three carotid waveforms for both measures.ResultsSingle waveform measurements of corrected flow time did not correlate with cardiac output (ρ = 0.25, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.49, p = 0.08), but an average of three waveforms correlated significantly, although weakly (ρ = 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–0.53, p = 0.046). Carotid blood flow measurements correlated moderately with cardiac output regardless of if single waveform or an average of three waveforms were used: ρ = 0.44, 95% CI 0.18–0.63, p = 0.004, and ρ = 0.41, 95% CI 0.16–0.62, p = 0.004, respectively.ConclusionsCarotid blood flow may be a better marker of cardiac output and less subject to measurements issues than corrected carotid flow time.

Highlights

  • Non-invasive measures that can accurately estimate cardiac output may help identify volumeresponsive patients

  • Repeat carotid ultrasound images and concurrent cardiac output (CO) measurements were obtained within 1 min after passive leg raise (PLR), as maximal blood flow changes were felt to be observed within 1 min [8, 29]

  • Overall image quality of the included patients was rated as above-average quality [mean score 4.1 ± standard deviation (SD) 0.6] based on global expert opinion

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Non-invasive measures that can accurately estimate cardiac output may help identify volumeresponsive patients. This study seeks to compare two non-invasive measures (corrected carotid flow time and carotid blood flow) and their correlations with invasive reference measurements of cardiac output. PLR is typically performed with the patient either in the supine or semirecumbent position, followed by repeat measurements with the patient’s legs passively raised at 30–45° [7]. This maneuver is considered to result in an auto-bolus of fluid of approximately 300 mL in volume [8]. The benefit of the PLR is that its hemodynamic effects are rapidly reversible, since no fluid administration takes place

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