Lithium Dilution Cardiac Output Measurement Research Articles

Effects of two alveolar recruitment manoeuvres (sustained inflation and stepwise) followed by positive end-expiratory pressure on cardiac output (measured with lithium dilution), invasive blood pressure and arterial oxygen tension in isoflurane-anaesthetised goats

Alveolar recruitment manoeuvres (ARM) performed during general anaesthesia improve oxygenation; however cardiovascular depression may be observed. The aim of the study was to compare the effects of sustained inflation (SI) and stepwise ARMs on cardiac output (CO), mean arterial blood pressure and arterial oxygen tension (PaO2) in ten mechanically ventilated goats anaesthetised with isoflurane.In the SI ARM, peak inspiratory presure (PIP) was increased to 30 cmH2O and sustained for 20 s. In the stepwise ARM, the PIP was increased by 5 cmH2O each minute for three minutes from 10 to 25 cmH2O. Both ARMs were followed by positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH2O. Paired lithium dilution CO measurements and arterial blood samples were obtained before and after each ARM. The order of the ARM was randomised and each goat was subjected to both techniques. Data was reported as median and interquartile range (IQR). Significance was set at 0.05.The median change in CO (measured by subtracting values after and before ARM) was −0.15 L min−1 (IQR -0.51; 0.03) and − 0.90 L min−1 (IQR -1.69; −0.58) for SI and stepwise ARM respectively (p = 0.04). The median change in PaO2 was 3 kPa (IQR -2.7; 7.6) and 0.4 kPa (IQR -3.4; 5.5) for SI and stepwise ARM respectively (p = 0.03).In conclusion, SI ARM causes less impact on CO and provides a better improvement in PaO2 compared to stepwise ARM in goats.

Lithium dilution cardiac output measurement in the critically ill patient: determination of precision of the technique

Lithium dilution cardiac output by LiDCOplus (LiDCO, Cambridge, UK) is a validated methodology for measuring cardiac output. It is used to calibrate a pulse pressure analysis algorithm (PulseCO) for the continuous measurement of subsequent changes in this variable. The variability of measurements, or precision, within patients of lithium dilution cardiac output has not previously been described. Thirty-five hemodynamically stable patients in intensive care, with no significant variability in heart rate, mean arterial pressure or central venous pressure, were recruited. Fifty-three determinations of cardiac output were made, each using four lithium dilution measurement curves performed consecutively within a maximum period of 10 min. The coefficient of variation of the measurements was determined and used to derive the least significant change in cardiac output that this technique could reliably detect. For a single measurement, the coefficient of variation was 8%. This equates to the technique being able to detect a change (least significant change) between two measurements of 24%. Averaging two lithium dilution measurements improved the coefficient of variation to 6% with a least significant change of 17%. Using the average of three curves reduced the coefficient of variation to 5% with a least significant change of 14%. To achieve a good precision with this technique, three lithium dilution measurements should be averaged. This will allow changes in cardiac output of more than 14% to be reliably detected. The understanding of the precision of this technique allows the user to know when a real change has happened to their patient.

Lithium dilution cardiac output measurement in the critically ill patient: determination of precision of the technique

Background: Lithium dilution cardiac output by LiDCO TMplus (LiDCO, Cambridge, UK) is a validated methodology for measuring cardiac output. It is used to calibrate a pulse pressure analysis algorithm (PulseCO) for the continuous measurement of subsequent changes in this variable. The variability of measurements, or precision, within patients of lithium dilution cardiac output has not previously been described. Material and methods: Thirty-five hemodynamically stable patients in intensive care, with no significant variability in heart rate, mean arterial pressure or central venous pressure, were recruited. Fifty-three determinations of cardiac output were made, each using four lithium dilution measurement curves performed consecutively within a maximum period of 10 min. The coefficient of variation of the measurements was determined and used to derive the least significant change in cardiac output that this technique could reliably detect. Results: For a single measurement, the coefficient of variation was 8%. This equates to the technique being able to detect a change (least significant change) between two measurements of 24%. Averaging two lithium dilution measurements improved the coefficient of variation to 6% with a least significant change of 17%. Using the average of three curves reduced the coefficient of variation to 5% with a least significant change of 14%. Conclusions: To achieve a good precision with this technique, three lithium dilution measurements should be averaged. This will allow changes in cardiac output of more than 14% to be reliably detected. The understanding of the precision of this technique allows the user to know when a real change has happened to their patient.

Consenso brasileiro de monitorização e suporte hemodinâmico - parte III: métodos alternativos de monitorização do débito cardíaco e da volemia

Cardiac output and preload as absolute data do not offer helpful information about the hemodynamic of critically ill patients. However, monitoring the response of these variables to volume challenge or inotropic drugs is a very useful tool in the critical care setting, particularly for patients with signs of tissue hypoperfusion. Although PAC remains the " gold standard" to measure cardiac output and preload, new and alternative technologies were developed to evaluate these hemodynamic variables. Modified Delphi methodology was used to create and quantify the consensus between the participants. AMIB indicated a coordinator who invited more six experts in the area of monitoring and hemodynamic support to constitute the Consensus Advisory Board. Twenty three physician and two nurses selected from different regions of the country completed the expert panel, which reviewed the pertinent bibliography listed at the MEDLINE in the period from 1996 to 2004. Recommendations regarding the use of arterial pulse pressure variation during mechanical ventilation, continuous arterial pulse contour and lithium dilution cardiac output measurements, esophageal Doppler waveform, thoracic electrical bioimpedance, echocardiography and partial CO2 rebreathing for monitoring cardiac output and preload were created. The new and less invasive techniques for the measurement of cardiac output, preload or fluid responsiveness are accurate and may be an alternative to PAC in critically ill patients.

Continuous and intermittent lithium dilution cardiac output measurements

Continuous and intermittent lithium dilution cardiac output measurements

Effect of background serum lithium concentrations on the accuracy of lithium dilution cardiac output determination in dogs.

To assess the effect of increasing serum lithium concentrations on lithium dilution cardiac output (LiDCO) determination and to determine the ability to predict the serum lithium concentration from the cumulative lithium chloride dosage. 10 dogs (7 males, 3 females). Cardiac output (CO) was determined in anesthetized dogs by measuring LiDCO and thermodilution cardiac output (TDCO). The effect of the serum lithium concentration on LiDCO was assessed by observing the agreement between TDCO and LiDCO at various serum lithium concentrations. Also, cumulative lithium chloride dosage was compared with the corresponding serum lithium concentrations. 44 paired observations were used. The linear regression analysis for the effect of the serum lithium concentration on the agreement between TDCO and LiDCO revealed a slope of -1.530 (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.388 to -0.671) and a y-intercept of 0.011 (r2 = 0.235). The linear regression analysis for the effect of the cumulative lithium chloride dosage on the serum lithium concentration revealed a slope of 2.291 (95% CI, 2.153 to 2.429) and a y-intercept of 0.008 (r2 = 0.969). The LiDCO measurement increased slightly as the serum lithium concentration increased. This error was not clinically relevant and was minimal at a serum lithium concentration of 0.1 mmol/L and modest at a concentration of 0.4 mmol/L. The serum lithium concentration can be reliably predicted from the cumulative lithium dosage if lithium chloride is administered often within a short period.

Lithium dilution cardiac output measurement in oleic acid–induced pulmonary edema

Objective: To determine whether lung injury influences the accuracy of lithium dilution cardiac output (CO) measurement. Design: Animal experimental study. Setting: Animal experimental laboratory. Participants: Swine (n = 23) weighing 26.4 ± 2.47 kg (mean ± SD). Interventions: The animals were anesthetized and tracheotomized, then a pulmonary artery catheter was inserted into the right jugular vein, and a catheter (18G) was placed in the femoral artery. After median sternotomy and pericardiotomy, a left ventricular catheter (18G) was directly inserted. CO was measured by giving a bolus injection of lithium chloride into either the right atrium or the left ventricle in each animal. After control measurements, permeability pulmonary edema was initiated by infusing oleic acid into the central vein (injury). About 2 hours after oleic acid infusion, CO measurements were repeated in the same manner as the control measurement had been taken. Measurements and Main Results: Under each condition, right atrium lithium injection was similar to left ventricle lithium injection. The mean of these differences at injury (−0.06 ± 0.55 L/min) was the same as that at control (−0.05 ± 0.36 L/min). Conclusions: Although the variability of lithium dilution CO measurement after oleic acid–induced pulmonary edema was greater than that of the control, this technique was acceptable even in cases of lung injury. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Lithium dilution cardiac output measurements using a peripheral injection site comparison with central injection technique and thermodilution.

The lithium dilution technique for the measurement of cardiac output by the central injection of lithium chloride was introduced by Linton et al. in 1993. In the present report, we compare lithium dilution cardiac output measurement (LD) by the peripheral injection of lithium chloride (pLD) and by central venous injection (cLD), cardiac output determined by electromagnetic flowmetry (EM), and conventional thermodilution cardiac output measurement (TD) on ten swine. The animals were monitored with a pulmonary artery catheter, a femoral artery catheter, and an electromagnetic flowmeter placed around the ascending aorta. cLD, pLD, TD, and EM were determined at the baseline, then in a hyperdynamic state produced by dobutamine administration, at a second baseline, and finally in a hypodynamic state induced by propranolol during deep anesthesia. Data were analyzed by linear regression analysis and the comparison method described by Bland and Altman; bias and precision were calculated using the method of Sheiner and Beal. The correlation coefficient between pLD and EM (0.86) was significantly less than that between cLD and EM (0.96), however it was not significantly different from that between TD and EM (0.85). The precision value of pLD (0.14) was the same as that of TD (0.14). The results of the present study indicate that pLD is a reliable technique.

Comparison of the accuracy of the lithium dilution technique with the thermodilution technique for measurement of cardiac output

A new indicator dilution technique for measurement of cardiac output is described. Lithium chloride is injected via a central venous catheter and its dilution curve measured in arterial blood using a lithium-selective electrode. We assessed the lithium dilution cardiac output measurement (LiDCO) and a conventional thermodilution cardiac output measurement (ThDCO) by comparing the results of both with cardiac output determined by electromagnetic flowmetry (EMCO) under controlled laboratory conditions in 10 swine. They were monitored with a pulmonary artery catheter, femoral artery catheter and electromagnetic flowmeter placed around the ascending aorta. LiDCO, ThDCO and EMCO measurements were determined at baseline, in a hyperdynamic state produced by administration of dobutamine, at a second baseline and finally in a hypodynamic state induced by propranolol during deep anaesthesia. Data were analysed by linear regression analysis and the comparison method described by Bland and Altman; bias and precision of both LiDCO and ThDCO compared with EMCO were calculated by the method of Sheiner and Beal. The correlation coefficient between LiDCO and EMCO (0.95) was higher than that between ThDCO and EMCO (0.87). The precision value of LiDCO (0.04) was significantly less (i.e. better) than that of ThDCO (0.09). The results of this study indicated that LiDCO was more reliable compared with conventional ThDCO.