Abstract
Background. Cardiac output (CO) is an indicator in the treatment of patients in critical condition. There are many methods for assessment CO, both invasive and non-invasive. All methods have their advantages and disadvantages, but the perfect method has not been found.
 Aim. Comparison of the assessment of СО by the PiCCO method and Fick's indirect method.
 Materials and methods. A pilot observational study was conducted on the basis of O.O. Shalimov National institute of surgery and transplantology. 12 results of CO measurement by the PiCCO method and CO calculation by the indirect Fick method in three patients were analysed. We analysed the results using the Excel descriptive statistics method, and also evaluated correlation in Excel.
 Results. The correlation coefficient of CO, estimated by more methods, r = 0.96, which showed the result of a high correlation of results. However, absolute values varied from 1.7 % to 19.9 %, which can be an acceptable error in conditions of limited resources. Correlation coefficient of cardiac index r = 0.98, and stroke volume index r = 0.98, which is also about high connection. Stroke volume correlation coefficient r = 0.64, which has a moderate connection. Variation in cardiac index and stroke volume vere within wide ranges (from 0.25 % to 27 % and from 1 % to 33 %, respectively).
 Conclusion. Cardiac output calculated by Fick's method in patients with sepsis and septic shock can be an alternative to CO determined by the PiCCO method in the case of limited resources.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
