000204192 001__ 204192
000204192 005__ 20181203023722.0
000204192 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.medengphy.2014.06.019
000204192 022__ $$a1350-4533
000204192 02470 $$2ISI$$a000343628600015
000204192 037__ $$aARTICLE
000204192 245__ $$aFirst in vivo application and evaluation of a novel method for non-invasive estimation of cardiac output
000204192 260__ $$bElsevier$$c2014$$aOxford
000204192 269__ $$a2014
000204192 300__ $$a6
000204192 336__ $$aJournal Articles
000204192 520__ $$aSurgical or critically ill patients often require continuous assessment of cardiac output (CO) for diagnostic purposes or for guiding therapeutic interventions. A new method of non-invasive CO estimation has been recently developed, which is based on pressure wave analysis. However, its validity has been examined only in silico. Aim of this study was to evaluate in vivo the reproducibility and accuracy of the "systolic volume balance" method (SVB). Twenty two subjects underwent 2-D transthoracic echocardiography for CO measurement (reference value of CO). The application of SVB method required aortic pressure wave analysis and estimation of total arterial compliance. Aortic pulses were derived by mathematical transformation of radial pressure waves recorded by applanation tonometry. Total compliance was estimated by the "pulse pressure" method. The agreement, association, variability, bias and precision between Doppler and SVB measures of CO were evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), mean difference, SD of differences, percentage error (PR) and Bland-Altman analysis. SVB yielded very reproducible CO estimates (ICC = 0.84, mean difference 0.27 +/- 0.73 L/min, PR = 16.7%). SVB-derived CO was comparable with Doppler measurements, indicating a good agreement and accuracy (ICC = 0.74, mean difference = -0.22 +/- 0.364 L/min, PR approximate to 15). The basic mathematical and physical principles of the SVB method provide highly reproducible and accurate estimates of CO compared with echocardiography. (C) 2014 IPEM. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
000204192 6531_ $$aCardiac output monitoring
000204192 6531_ $$aPulse contour analysis
000204192 6531_ $$aArterial compliance
000204192 6531_ $$aAortic pressure wave
000204192 6531_ $$aStroke volume
000204192 700__ $$uUniv Athens, Sch Med, Hippokrat Hosp, Dept Cardiol 1,Biomed Engn Unit, Athens 11528, Greece$$aPapaioannou, Theodore G.
000204192 700__ $$uUniv Athens, Sch Med, Hippokrat Hosp, Dept Cardiol 1,Biomed Engn Unit, Athens 11528, Greece$$aSoulis, Dimitrios
000204192 700__ $$0244988$$g192494$$uSwiss Fed Inst Technol, Ecole Polytech Fed Lausanne, Inst Bioengn, Lab Hemodynam & Cardiovasc Technol, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland$$aVardoulis, Orestis
000204192 700__ $$aProtogerou, Athanase
000204192 700__ $$aSfikakis, Petros P.
000204192 700__ $$0240635$$g106482$$uSwiss Fed Inst Technol, Ecole Polytech Fed Lausanne, Inst Bioengn, Lab Hemodynam & Cardiovasc Technol, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland$$aStergiopulos, Nikolaos
000204192 700__ $$aStefanadis, Christodoulos$$uUniv Athens, Sch Med, Hippokrat Hosp, Dept Cardiol 1,Biomed Engn Unit, Athens 11528, Greece
000204192 773__ $$j36$$tMedical Engineering & Physics$$k10$$q1352-1357
000204192 909C0 $$xU11843$$0252351$$pLHTC
000204192 909CO $$pSTI$$particle$$ooai:infoscience.tind.io:204192
000204192 917Z8 $$x192494
000204192 937__ $$aEPFL-ARTICLE-204192
000204192 973__ $$rREVIEWED$$sPUBLISHED$$aEPFL
000204192 980__ $$aARTICLE