Journal article

The "systolic volume balance" method for the noninvasive estimation of cardiac output based on pressure wave analysis

Papaioannou TG, Vardoulis O, Stergiopulos N. The "systolic volume balance" method for the noninvasive estimation of cardiac output based on pressure wave analysis. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 302: H2064-H2073, 2012. First published March 16, 2012; doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00052.2012.-Cardiac output (CO) monitoring is essential for the optimal management of critically ill patients. Several mathematical methods have been proposed for CO estimation based on pressure waveform analysis. Most of them depend on invasive recording of blood pressure and require repeated calibrations, and they suffer from decreased accuracy under specific conditions. A new systolic volume balance (SVB) method, including a simpler empirical form (eSVB), was derived from basic physical principles that govern blood flow and, in particular, a volume balance approach for the conservation of mass ejected into and flowed out of the arterial system during systole. The formulas were validated by a one-dimensional model of the systemic arterial tree. Comparisons of CO estimates between the proposed and previous methods were performed in terms of agreement and accuracy using "real" CO values of the model as a reference. Five hundred and seven different hemodynamic cases were simulated by altering cardiac period, arterial compliance, and resistance. CO could be accurately estimated by the SVB method as follows: CO = C x PPao/(T - P-sm x T-s/P-m) and by the eSVB method as follows: CO = k x C x PPao/T, where C is arterial compliance, PPao is aortic pulse pressure, T is cardiac period, P-sm is mean systolic pressure, T-s is systolic duration, P-m is mean pressure, and k is an empirical coefficient. SVB applied on aortic pressure waves did not require calibration or empirical correction for CO estimation. An empirical coefficient was necessary for brachial pressure wave analysis. The difference of SVB-derived CO from model CO (for brachial waves) was 0.042 +/- 0.341 l/min, and the limits of agreement were -0.7 to 0.6 l/min, indicating high accuracy. The intraclass correlation coefficient and root mean square error between estimated and "real" CO were 0.861 and 0.041 l/min, respectively, indicating very good accuracy. eSVB also provided accurate estimation of CO. An in vivo validation study of the proposed methods remains to be conducted.


Related material